 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Bush's speech
|
|
|
Subject: Bush's speech From: DougR Date: 20 Sep 01 - 10:36 PM Ugh, the President of the U.S. made a speech tonight. Anyone listen to it? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: catspaw49 Date: 20 Sep 01 - 10:38 PM Yes. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Gary T Date: 20 Sep 01 - 10:39 PM I caught the last ten minutes or so. I liked what I heard. Is "ugh" your reaction to it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Lepus Rex Date: 20 Sep 01 - 10:44 PM I heard it. Got some laughs out of it. Got annoyed. He came off as a arrogant and chauvanistic, of course, but did surprisingly well for a 'special' president. ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: SINSULL Date: 20 Sep 01 - 10:46 PM Did any of you notice that he just declared war on terrorists and anyone who harbors them? This will get very ugly. I have a 26 year old son and I am not laughing or ughing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Amos Date: 20 Sep 01 - 10:50 PM Not at all. I have scorned every public speech the man has made; I have belittled him as dysfunctional and illiterate and stupid. But this speech was a complete reversal. It touched every major issud that needed to be touched, and did it well. It was NOT arrogant -- but it was real. It contained enough humility to be palatable, enough threat to be meaningful, and enough compassion to win friends not only from the various camps in the US but also from the many camps in the middle East, except those who know they have been supporting or practicing terrorism. It was the first time I have cheered for a Presidential speech by a Republican since Ike warned us against the military industrial complex. I think it was the best speech I have heard in many, many years. It said some things that might appear frightening, but nowhere as frightening as the images that poured out of New York last week, and it was balanced but adequately determined. I'm sorry -- I never expected to think highly of a Dubya sopeech; I believe he has done some remarkable growing up in the last two weeks, for whatever reason, and I for one am at least willing to recognize that he has. If it was just his speechwriters, then I'll eat my words willingly. But I think he crystallized every major uncertainty in our minds about things since last Tuesday and address them eloquently and well. And that's what I saw on Mulberry Street, anyway. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Mudlark Date: 20 Sep 01 - 10:53 PM I missed his speech...out on the porch playing honkytonk songs with my Okie neighbor (he actually IS from Muskogie)...but I've been dismayed and alarmed by the cowboy swagger Bush seems to have picked up along with his 80% approval ratings. There are a lot of cool heads in the US...I can only hope that rationality prevails. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Justa Picker Date: 20 Sep 01 - 10:57 PM I watched the speech. I liked it, and I liked his delivery. I obviously want the efforts to succeed. I only have 1 question.
How can this "campaign" have a prayer of succeeding given that there are 60 nations harboring terrorists and terrorist camps. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Amos Date: 20 Sep 01 - 10:57 PM Watch rthe reruns Mudlark. Believe it or not, this is a different son of a bitch than the one you were dismayed by, I think!! I was absolutely taken by surprise. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: allie kiwi Date: 20 Sep 01 - 10:58 PM I thought the speach was well written, and was amazed at how good a speaker Mr Bush is. Inspirational. Countries need good speach givers when they are entering a time of war. Look at Hitler, look at Churchill. A shame about the content though. Allie
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Troll Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:03 PM Oh well... Ya can't please everybody. But he did do a creditable job. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: DougR Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:04 PM Well Mudlark, if, in this time in our history, you couldn't take forty minutes to listen to what may well be the most important speech in many moons, I guess whatever you think doesn't matter much to me one way or the other. Others will feel differently I know. Hell! Many Mudcatters may encourage you to run for President! I thought it was a great speech. And I have yet to hear, from any of the individuals interviewed on any of the cable or TV networks interviewed ...liberal and conservative, that did not agree. His speech was well written and well delivered. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Amos Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:06 PM The content, a shame? You mean the facts the content was about, i think? I heard no substantive part of the content of that address to which "shame" could easily be attached. It is a shame we have been attacked, true. It is a shame we did not somehow make allies with Islam long ago and tend the relationships so this never happened. All shames. But the content of the speech, in its context, was of high quality.
A. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: ddw Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:07 PM Actually, Mudlark, I agree pretty wholeheartedly with Amos's assessment. I had never thought much of Dubya's thinking or speaking ability, but that was a lot closer to a masterful performance than I would have expected. I was particularly pleased to hear him very carefully reign in the rednecks who would beat the hell out of anybody with a brown skin by repeatedly stressing that the enemy is not Muslims or Arab and Asian friends, but a small group of extremists and their supporters. All in all, I thought it was much more level-headed than might have been expected. I was afraid he would go off half-cocked and rattle the sabre a lot louder to appeal to the ultraconservatives and reactionaries. That, since I have a son in the U.S. Air Force, would have been very scary for me. david |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Deckman Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:07 PM Since the bombing in New York and D.C. last week, I've been trying to make sense of it. I've been reading non-stop, talking with people I value as having sensible ideas. Here's where I am ... WE BOMB THEM ... THEY BOMB US ... WELL DUH! I know that at this early time, my expression will not be populiar ... populiar has never been one of my impotances. CHEERS, Bob |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: allie kiwi Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:19 PM The speach was made by an american, for americans. And it pleased americans. However, what action President Bush takes, and the rest of america, affects us all. Some of his statements showed the insular thinking that frustrates many of us non-americans. That is 'a shame'. it shows that he in particular has learned nothing from the whole tragedy, about how the USA is viewed and why. Allie
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Lepus Rex Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:24 PM Yeah, Allie, like his demands to Afghanistan, spoken as if it were a naughty U.S. state rather than a sovereign nation he was addressing. ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Mudlark Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:25 PM To Amos and ddw....Thanks for the review....I will definitely tune in to reruns....it cheers me to hear that nonfans thot highly of it....I don't WANT to think my president a John Wayne wannabe.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Lepus Rex Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:29 PM Oh, he is, Mudlark. He just tried extra-hard to read the teleprompter tonight. (I know a little boy who's going to get an extra helping of Jell-O® after dinner tonight!) ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: allie kiwi Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:30 PM Do you truely believe that they out there *gestures widely* hate you because of that there democratically elected government in that there chamber, and because of your freedom of speach etc etc as he said? That is so simplistic and so wrong. But great propganda. Allie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Troll Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:32 PM Why bother. Good night Lepus. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Lepus Rex Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:39 PM What, no kiss? :) ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Jack the Sailor Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:39 PM THE QUALITY OF THE SPEECH!!!?????!!! WHO CARES?? HE JUST DREW A HELL OF A SCARY LINE IN THE SAND!!! Pardon me for getting excited. But I am afraid! I believe that we are a miscalculation or two away from World War Three. Imagine Vietnam with 800,000,000 Viet Cong! Oh God, please look after that man and show him the way through this. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: heric Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:43 PM allie: I don't believe the aspects you complain of were borne from an insensitivity to world opinion. I think that after careful deliberation, they decided that under the necessities of the situation, the U.S. can only devote a certain amount of time to coalition building. I believe they tried very carefully to stress the importance to them of international support, but they cannot spend too much time garnering worldwide consensus; it would be like herding mudcats, and as time passes disagreement as to appropriate actions and specifics will increase, not coalesce. This is a time for action, and the U.S. cannot spend much time begging for support. They have to do what they believe they have to do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Lepus Rex Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:44 PM I agree, Jack. Despite all my flippant remarks earlier, the speech really did concern me. I felt really sick listening to it. "We" really don't want to try and occupy Afghanistan... ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Amos Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:44 PM Some people hate "America" (whatever that means) for some reasons, others for others. If you publish a fatwah that declares all Americans fair game because they are Satan, you are making it pretty clear that your objection tot hem is based on the fact that they think poeple should choose their own religion. That's the big Satanic position which fanatacism can't tolerate. Or maybe it is just because we have been involved in so many stupid international blunders. I concur we have earned some of our enemies, on the whole. Allie, tell me why you think "they out there" hate "all of us". I know it isn't an equation with much substance, but what is your thinking on it? A. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: gus C Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:52 PM I thought it was a lot better than "we're gonna get the folks who knocked down these buildings". I was very glad to hear it sounds like it is going to be a very tempered response. I think we should air drop loaves of bread , see how many people in Afganistan figure out what's in their best interest. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: allie kiwi Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:53 PM I apologise for coming across as insensitive. But beleive me, we are just as afraid as you of war. and it looks scarily like no-one in power over there is considering anything BUT war. How about looking at other options? Instead of War, the USA should put money into the economies that prodiced these terrorists. we do not have a one country to fight - there are people from Lebanon, there are people from Afghanistan. There is also the United Arab Emirates. do we bomb them all? If we kill Bin Laden, 100 more will rise to fill his martyred shoes. And beleive me, and a martyr he will become. What is a fundamentalist? what produces a terrorist is what we should be asking. Why did they hate so much? what can we do to prevent it? I do not like war... people who often fight believe strongly so much in something that the others equally strongly oppose. You cannot do the same back to people - it makes you as evil. So if Bush goes in guns blazing and kills a lot of civilians, he will be just as bad - worse even, because he had a choice That is my simplistic view. I am sorry if I offend. Allie
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: DougR Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:54 PM I Hurricane: your example is hilarious! "It would be like herding mudcats!" That's terrific! Can you imagine what a job that would be? Jack the Sailor: Ok. So you weren't impressed with the speech. And you are afraid. What would you suggest we do? Invite the Terriorists in for tea? Maybe a chat about what they view as their justification for killing over 5,000 people? God forbid that you were ever on a highjacked airplane, but if you were, do you think it would help to tell the highjackers that you didn't agree with the "line in the sand?" Good luck if that ever happens. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Amos Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:57 PM No offense intended, Allie, and none taken. I understand your fear. In New Zealand, are you? Don't think you have much to fear there. Thanks for your message, and its honesty. I wish the approach you have described could honestly be taken effectively. But I don't believe that it could. I have no idea what the costs would be to resurrect economies which have themselves failed to stand up and flourish. I am not sure all the money in the world could cure the inherent misconceptions that are at work. I don't ean to sound glib, really. I just have no idea how to think about so monumental an idea. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Amos Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:59 PM If you missed the speech, it can be found at this site. I would ask that you review it before reaching your own conclusion about its import. A. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: DougR Date: 21 Sep 01 - 12:04 AM AMOS! How dare you? You're asking for INFORMED opinions? How unMudcat of you! :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Jack the Sailor Date: 21 Sep 01 - 12:06 AM None of them hate all Americans, But when American action or inaction starves them, cause their houses to be destroyed or kills their family members they get pissed off. George Senior gave lip service to the "oppressed" people of Iraq. Bombed the hell out of their infrastructure them stopped a few hundred miles short of liberating them. We Still Bomb ten years later. And our sanctions are causing the people to suffer. If George Bush does the same to Afghanistan, Iraq(Again), Syria, Sudan, Lybia, Lebanon, Etc. It will not end well. God Bless America. God Please help America. Israel is now accusing Arrafat of breaking the ceasefire. because a couple of gunmen attacked a car. The Israeli's are now considering Military action against civilian and police targets in Palestinian territory when they know damned well that Arrafat had now control over these terrorists. Of couse the next bombing will make a few more lads take up arms to avenge their friend and family. Do we want them to export this madness to the rest of the world? If Bush is going to destroy Taliban I hope to God that his coalition will be there to pick up the pieces. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: allie kiwi Date: 21 Sep 01 - 12:06 AM Yes, I am from New Zealand. And I think we are in a tricky situation here being nuclear free - not a popular stance under most circumstances, and certainly not now. Also, our Navy and Airforce almost cease to exist in December, so even if we say, 'yep we'll be in with bells on!', we will need to add 'can you pick us up on the way?' As to my thoughts on why people have dislike and anger against the USA, I'll have to come back with that later, if you don't mind. I've needs must get my toad up from his nap (the resident toddler). Allie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Troll Date: 21 Sep 01 - 12:09 AM Allie, economics has very little to do with it. Osama bin Laden is a millionaire many times over. Some of his recruits may well have joined because of poverty but most are fanatics as well. Their reasons for hating us are several. 1) bin Laden has stated that we have invaded the sacred soil of the Arabian pennisula because we have a base in Saudi Arabia. The fact that the Saudi Govt.invited us seems not to matter. 2)The treatment of the Palestinian Arabs by the Israeli Govt. We back the Israelis with Massive aid. Nuff sed. 3) The control of Jerusalem. The Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem covers the third holiest spot in Islam; the place where Mohammad ascended to heaven, and the Al Aqsa mosque is the associated Mosque. The fly in the ointment is that that's the same place where Solomans Temple once stood and that's sacred to the Jews who happen to control Jerusalem. This is simplistic but you get the idea. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: CarolC Date: 21 Sep 01 - 12:15 AM My honest response is that I was slightly more comfortable with him prior to hearing his speach. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: DougR Date: 21 Sep 01 - 12:19 AM Jeeze, Carol, how could that be possible? You mean to say you were once comfortable with him? What a puzzlement. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: gus C Date: 21 Sep 01 - 12:20 AM I didn't hear it being a scarier line in the sand then it was obviously going to be. I thought it was more diplomatic then most things he has said. I wanna know who's idea it was to name it OPERATION INFINITE JUSTICE, that scared the beegezus out of me, that someone could suggest that and it would leave whatever room it was suggested in, mineaswell call it OPERATION WWWIII. Maybe that is why I found the speech mild, I thought for the first time he measured his words, careful not to paint the whole middle east with a brush stroke and most importantly implying empathy with the citizens of Afganistan, as themselves suffering unfortunately with the taliban goverment. I think it will be the careful, focused response, more now than I did yesterday. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: katlaughing Date: 21 Sep 01 - 12:26 AM I did not listen, I cannot stomach the sound of his voice, nor looking at his smug smirking face. I will, however, go read it. Thanks, Amos, for the link. Rog heard the Canadians were calling for trials at the Hague for bin Laden and/or whomever. This makes a lot more sense to me than any kind of war. Whatever America does will have repercussions around the world. Rog also heard on NPR or tv, that Bush had used the word "crusade" several times in the past few days. This, imo, shows his complete ignorance of world politics and history. Allie Kiwi, you make some very good points. If you look back through some of the threads immediately after last Tuesday, you will find many of us agree that the reasons why these kinds of things happen are of extreme importance. If America acts with cooler heads and manages to not get into a protracted worthless Viet Nam type non-declared war in Afghanistan, it will be because her citizens have let their voices be heard and also because governments and their people around the world have also spoken up. May (your) god make it so. kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: CarolC Date: 21 Sep 01 - 12:27 AM DougR, if you can find a place in the Mudcat where I have clearly stated what I thought of President Bush, please point me to it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: GUEST,Karen Date: 21 Sep 01 - 12:40 AM With all due respect, Jack the Sailor, I tend to disagree with you as to who drew the line in the sand. The thought of any war makes me queasy, and this one in particular makes me feel very ill, frightened, and heart-sick. But then, I don't have to tell the relatives and friends of 6000 plus people what we're going to do about it. I thought the speech was very direct and, if he wasn't sincere, he sure has great eye control. I do agree with you that we need to really look at the events leading up to the current situation and work on finding solutions as best we can. The speech gave me more than a little hope that this will be done, I sincerely hope we won't be disappointed. I felt that the reasons given for why we are hated was a bit more patriotic than realistic but, he is new to the position, he didn't cause the past events (so far as I know or have reason to think), and...he's got a very hard position to hold at present. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: CarolC Date: 21 Sep 01 - 12:41 AM In fact, if you can find more than a half dozen places where I've even made vague references to what I think of him, please let me know. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Rosebrook Date: 21 Sep 01 - 12:47 AM The speech, I thought, was well crafted, and delivered well. The speech scared my 14 year old daughter moreso than the events of last Tuesday. When she asked, "What's he trying to do - look tough? start a war?", I explained that it is perceived that a war has already been declared on America, and our country's leader is responding. Yes, it seemed to me that Bush is preparing the people for the beginning of WWIII. As for the choice of being for us or against us that each and every country must now decide, the dichotomy is remeniscent of bin Laden. Polls are taken of the American people - are you for or against taking military action in response to the attack against America? and people are saying yes moreso than no. To what are we saying yes? How will the events of military engagement effect the lives of those people being polled? No more silk stockings? Gas vouchers? Electricity rations? What are we in for? I appreciated Bush making the distinction between people of the Middle East and terrorists, between true Islams and those who would distort religious beliefs. It was good to hear those words from this country's leader. As did so many others, I condemned the Taliban several years ago when they began inflicting human rights violations on the people of Afghanistan. It took an act of terrorism directed at us of this caliber for America to take a stand against a regime so horrific. I pray that our world's leaders will look back and learn from history, and stop repeating the same mistakes. rose |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Don Firth Date: 21 Sep 01 - 12:55 AM I hardly expected to be, but I was pretty impressed with Bush's speech. Among other things, he made it quite plain that wemay see overt military actions taken, and then again we may not! Now, that may seem ambiguous, but under these bizarre (to Americans) circumstances, it isn't. It's pretty obvious that a lot of what is going to take place will be covert. And that's the way it should be. Has to be. I heard a couple of programs earlier today (9/20) that featured some pretty knowledgeable people (experts on terrorism) discussing how terrorists were handled in their countries, how effective it had or had not been, and what they thought the U. S. should do. Bush (or his advisors) seem to have picked up on some of the better ideas -- which do not include wholesale slaughter in Afghanistan. One of the ideas was the creation of a special office to handle and coordinate all matters relating to terrorist activity, and that is exactly what Bush has done by creating a new cabinet post. Using a sledge-hammer is a really dumb way to try to swat mosquitoes. You get damned few mosquitoes that way and you do a hell of a lot of unnecessary damage. If Bush doesn't know that, I'm pretty sure that his advisors do. Before you conclude that the country is under the control of a total idiot, listen to or read the speech -- carefully. No, I didn't vote for him. And if I had the chance, I wouldn't vote for him again. But there he is, and I think he did pretty well tonight. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: kendall Date: 21 Sep 01 - 01:06 AM I forgot all about it. Gordon Bok came for the evening and overnight, and we made music and swapped stories until after 1 am. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: CarolC Date: 21 Sep 01 - 01:15 AM (heh heh heh... that oughta keep him busy for a while ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: GUEST Date: 21 Sep 01 - 01:17 AM Carol, nevermind what DougR says. His attitudeis such that republicans can do no wrong. It makes me wonder what he thought of David Duke. Like, Kat, I cannot stand Junior. I cannot stand his voice, I cannot stand the fact that he either always has a smirk on his face or a look of utter stupidity. I did read the speach, though, and I have shivers going down my spine. I see war abroad with anyone who does not agree with the US. I see anybody who holds their own political beliefs being arrested. Freedom of speach will fly out the window once again. Such an elusive bird is that. Everyday I see cars and houses all of a sudden flying their flags and for the above reasons I have stated I have refused to fly one of my own. I also noticed that references were made to praying and God. That also I see as wrong. To me it says that only religions that believe in God (or Allah) are valid. That means that the hundreds of other beliefs floating around the country have no voice. To me this points to another threat besides terrorism. This points to a revision of the bill of rights. NIT |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: wysiwyg Date: 21 Sep 01 - 01:23 AM I think how the speech was made, in terms of crafting it, is quite simple. He found a voice the other day in a press conference-- the stuff leading up to "Dead or Alive." (That line was a Bad BooBoo.) But before that line, he had begun to preach. He had begun to find a voice and to say what his heart had in it. This speaking from the heart shooting from the hip, continued since that day. So I think the speechwriters studied THAT-- George at his best till then-- someone they had probably never seen-- and wrote accordingly. Also some of the lines in tonight's talk also were clearly his. I think his lifetime of church-going simply kicked in-- he has obviously heard a lot of good preaching, that's all, and now he's using those lessons to preach what he thinks matters in this situation. In between talking about what matters, he is as dum as ever, and terrified about speaking-- see the fear just before and after he steps up to the plate. I mean podium. But in the grip of something that has affected him deeply, he is coming out of that terror to preach, because the "cause" is more important to him than the fear. And I don't mean the stuff about prayer-- for a Christian that part was amazingly restrained, I thought. I mean, preaching his mission, our need for resolve, etc., and to fight terrorism. Another thing that has changed is that he is actually being himself much more-- he is clearly having a lot of feelings, not just mouthing a lot of rehearsed positions his handlers have fed him. He is connected now to his gut-- a lesson George Senior never did learn. From this place I think he can actually think much more clearly. Finally I think he is finding (God help us all), a project he can truly own, completely separate from his father's legacy or the demands of the fragile Republican coalition who "elected" him and who have been running his game for him. He has had to be let loose to BE the Prezz, and he clearly relishes it--- poor Dick Cheney having to back off to stay in a safe place--- George is out of the nest now probably for good. Oh yes, and one other thing he did tonight-- didja miss it? I saw a man starting a project he knows full well will almost certainly require that we send him back to Penny Ave. for another four. First and ten! yours truly, I remain, ~Not a Bush Supporter, Just a Keen Observer |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Troll Date: 21 Sep 01 - 01:25 AM DiD he say YOU had to pray? Which God was he referring to? Did he say? NO? I thought not. As far as Doug thinking that Republicans can do no wrong, I think he holds the Republican leaders to a higher standard than the Democrats did Bill Clinton and his ilk. It is a bit strange to hear liberals (I'm speaking generically now) worried about the bill of rights when most of them have been working like beavers to tear up the Second Amendment. That's more than just a little hypocritical, wouldn't you say? troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: GUEST Date: 21 Sep 01 - 01:33 AM Odd, but I don't recall ever saying that I am against the right to bear arms. Nor did I recall saying I was a Democrat. Living under that bridge must cause you to make too many assumptions. NIT |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Jack the Sailor Date: 21 Sep 01 - 02:18 AM I don't know if the proper Mudcat term is "Flamer or Trool" but DougR has been nothing but a shit disturber (my term) this whole thread. Doug, you smartass, my point was that if Bush is not carefull then one of us will probably end up being hijacked. I want JUSTICE for CRIME. An international trial at the Hague would do nicely. We could ask the Meccans to use their influence at the head of Islam to demonstate their outrage by declaring a jihad against bin Laden for the blasphemies against Islam about which Mr. Bush so eloquently spoke. If that doesn't work, then use the bombers. Korea was a war. The United States Government called it a "Police Action" It did not work out well. Vietnam was a war which was not officially called a war. This "war" should be a police action. Justice Doug, Justice. To all of you who want to discuss this rationally I just want to say that I think this will work out OK. I hope this will work out OK. I Pray this will work out OK. I realize that Mr. Bush felt he had to say war to get his $40,000,000 from Congress. I realize that the majority of the American people are impatient for revenge and that cooler heads in Washington must appease them with tough words and still may actually seek justice. But folks, the stakes are so high. I'm scared, really scared. I was looking for some comfort and was blindsided by Doug's trolling. In retrospect, I should have expected trolling and looked elsewhere. Again I say, for the sake of the whole world George, be careful. PS With all due respect Guest,Karen please read or reread my second post. If you can't understand my fears from what I have said there. All I can say is that when one talks of justice one talks of arrest and trial. Mr. Bush's speech is making this into vengance or war. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: DougR Date: 21 Sep 01 - 02:22 AM Nah, Carol, I know you are an honest person and if you say so, I believe you. I don't believe I ever implied that everything that Republicans did was poifect, Guest. But whatever I may have said in the last three years on the Mudcat, I damn well used my real name when I said it. Kendall, you disappoint me. (I'm sure that will cause you a sleepless night). Everyone here knows I had no use for Clinton, but when he delivered a keynote speech, I never failed to listen to him, and he made some damn good ones. I didn't start this thread because I expected the majority of Mudcatters to voice approval for Bush. I just kind of wondered how far you folks would go to show your liberal fairness, based on the fact that everybody else interviewed on TV after the speech, including leading Democrats, thought he did a damn good job. I'm not at all surprised. About what I expected. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Jack the Sailor Date: 21 Sep 01 - 02:24 AM Excuse me $40,000,000,000 of course. It is hard to think in terms of numbers so huge. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: bseed(charleskratz) Date: 21 Sep 01 - 02:25 AM I didn't see the speech, but I heard the last ten minutes or so on the car radio driving home from work. I missed the most outrageous things he said, I guess, judging from what bothered many previous posters. I thought the ending of the speech was reasonable, more reasonable than I had expected. But I thought his presentation, which featured regular emphasis on inappropriate words, showed that at best he's not much of a speaker and at worst that he might not have understood all that was written for him. --seed |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Joe Offer Date: 21 Sep 01 - 02:28 AM A situation like this makes me ask some hard questions about my stance as a pacifist. Nonetheless, I think this world needs people who will stand firm in support of nonviolent solutions to the problems of the world. I was happy that Bush made a distinction between the terrorists and ordinary, peaceful Muslims. Still, I'm very much afraid of what's going to happen in the next few months. I hope it ends soon, and I hope against hope that it will end peacefully. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Jack the Sailor Date: 21 Sep 01 - 02:45 AM DougR: In your last post you admit that you were trolling. Here:.... I didn't start this thread because I expected the majority of Mudcatters to voice approval for Bush. I just kind of wondered how far you folks would go to show your liberal fairness, based on the fact that everybody else interviewed on TV after the speech, including leading Democrats, thought he did a damn good job. I'm not at all surprised. About what I expected. You wasted my time you smug ************************* I have wasted enough time on you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Amos Date: 21 Sep 01 - 02:50 AM I share your hope, Joe. In my "realist mode", I have to say I don't think peaceful or soon will be the case. In my heart I hope for the intervention of some remarkable development. If I were the Taliban right now I would be making a list, and checking it twice, and planning a roundup. But, of course, I am not. Well, you knew that, too, I guess. G'night. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Peter Kasin Date: 21 Sep 01 - 03:03 AM It was one of the best presidential speeches I've ever heard. A great speech. He touched all bases, was eloquent, firm, humane, confident. It was a complete turnaround from the Bush who often speaks haltingly. For me, he said all the right things, and said them far better than I imagined he would. DougR is no "shit-stirrer"! This was an extremely important speech to the nation and Doug asked what we thought of it. -chanteyranger |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Mudlark Date: 21 Sep 01 - 03:36 AM I've just finished listening to the rerun of the speech in its entirety and I admit to being pleasantly surprised by the less furtive and more direct delivery....that alone is a relief. I think it will go down in time to come as a very well written.... speech--just that, with actions as yet to be determined and assessed. The actions described in this speech to be taken on the home front all seem reasonable and well thought out. However, the words regarding international action do cause me concern. The inherent "us or them, yer w/us or agin us" thinking is, to me, both simplistic and frightening.
Allie asks: " What is a fundamentalist? what produces a terrorist is what we should be asking." A more important question to me is what produces a fundamentalist? It is a question I've not ever been able to satisfy for myself...and fundamentalists of all stripe, in all religions, in all countries including the US, scare the living daylights out of me, I guess because to me they seem to have left rationality behind...it's like dealing with a crazy person. And I can't help but worry that pacific rationality may not be effective in the face of such craziness, whether it be bombing family planning clinics with nail-filled bombs, or blowing up buildings. In terms of the WWIII scenarios and worries, I thot the most reassuring ...words...were Bush's expectations that soon all our lives will go back to relative normal, to the point that he felt it necessary remind us we must maintain our vigalence and resolve. We'll see what actions come. Kendall...if I'd had a chance to hang out and play with Gordon Bok I'd have forgotten all about this speech too....I've never been a big fan of speeches anyway, but playing and singing, especially when the solace is so needed...now that IS a treasure. Nancy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: BlueJay Date: 21 Sep 01 - 03:47 AM Jack the Sailor- Sorry, but I disagree with your accusations of DougR being a flamer on this thread. He's expressing his opinion, and most of his posts on this thread are good naturedly, (is that a word)? humorous in tone. I don't think his posts on this thread qualify as flaming. If they are, then opposing viewpoints are equally guilty. If your accusation is related to previous threads, then it doesn't belong here. BTW, I more agree with you regarding the speech. I was more scared than inspired. We should all be scared shitless. I'm afraid that Shrub, Jr. is promising way more than our American society can deliver without leading to financial disaster and further loss of civil liberties. But DougR didn't do anything wrong here, IMO. I usually disagree with him politically, and I admit I don't often argue with him, as I suspect you have. But I do value his perspective. Helps me keep things in order. Does that make me a flamer, too? Thanks, BlueJay |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Lepus Rex Date: 21 Sep 01 - 03:48 AM I agree. Doug's not a flamer. He's just wrong all the time. :) ---Lepus Rex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: allie kiwi Date: 21 Sep 01 - 04:58 AM This thread has opened a few issues for me that I find interesting. Troll, thanks for running over the middle east/Israel issues for me. *sigh* It is a total no win situation, the whole world around, isn't it? Being so big means everything you do and don't do is so noticable - you help someone and it becomes 'interference', you dont help and you are 'ignoring the plight of innocents'. I guess what I was thinking more of was the economic sanctions - eg against Iraq after the Gulf war. someone up in this thread (sorry, cant remember who) mentioned about how Bin Laden is a millionare. That partly is my point. Economic sanctions will not effect the people we want to punish. Like Bin Laden, and S. Hussein. It is the ordinary citizens that suffer and go hungry and die for want of medical supplies. And that only adds fuel to the fire of the polititians on the 'other side'. i cannot see war doing anything except make the new upcoming generations of Afghanistan etc angry at the USA and allies. They may not remember the WTC attacks, but they will remember attacks on their own soil. Thanks Nancy, I too find fundmentalism strange and frightening, of all denominations. Sorry, this post is probably a little pointless. I sit here with a swollen lip after having been head butted by The Toad. Could someone try and outlaw toddlers for me? Allie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: harpgirl Date: 21 Sep 01 - 05:10 AM I too, thought the speech was well written. However, I believe it is unlikely that George crafted any of it himself except maybe for the bombastic parts. I do give him credit for practicing his delivery, as well. But the poor man was never the people's choice to begin with and he knows it. I suspect that the fact that it was widely well received is fortunate, because this did seem to help him believe that he must act presidential even if he is a pretender. If he plays the role well, as a result of listening to a broad range of thought and research as the speech seemed to demonstrate, he might not lead us into a huge holy war. Muslims outnumber Christians, though. And psychopathic despots have been hiding their true intentions under the guise of religious belief for a very long time. Ultimately, I believe US direction will reflect what is good for us economically and psychologically as a nation. I am not afraid that recent events will touch of a global war, just more senseless destruction of innocent human beings. As for Doug, shame on those of you who would deny him the right to his freely articulated opinion. That's what we are supposed to be defending. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Gervase Date: 21 Sep 01 - 07:00 AM After listening to Dubbya's speech lauded to the rafters by commentators this morning as the most statesmanlike speech ever by a US president, I'm baffled. To me it sounded like a collection of cheap-jack soundbites cobbled together by a Madison Avenue hack, designed to evoke suitable resonances of Churchill, Lincoln and Roosevelt but sounding flat, woolly and almost Blair-like in its vacuity. Even the delivery seemed to me to be as statesmanlike as a "speak your weight" machine. And to ask countries "are you with us or against us" is pointless rhetoric. Look at poor Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan. He has probably signed his own death warrant by agreeing to support US action in a limited way, so plenty of other national leaders can probably be forgiven for equivocating there. And across the world there can be countries avowedly against terrorism, but also against the sort of action that results in 30,000 deaths in Nicaragua, or the reign of terror in Chile, or the arrest of Nelson Mandela, or the refusal to extradite an IRA bomber. Grrr. Better lay in plenty of tins of Spam and batteries! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: InOBU Date: 21 Sep 01 - 07:09 AM I will share with you my letter to my bandmates... which is my reaction to the speach. Concider it an invitation to New York musicians as I expect to have a much smaller band today, perhaps one person unaccompanied on the stage. Join Joe and I, praying for peace. - Larry
Last night the president made a speach which hinted at limitations of freedom and described the US entering a world war. We are entering a time which may make the McCarthy era seem like a time of liberty. Some of us believe we will need to respond to this with art which preserves the ideals of liberty. Some will respond by keeping their heads down. You know the songs I write, they are thoughtful responces to our times. I have been writing to band members for days now, proposing that, for example we use art to help wounded firemen who have done so much for us, and I have gotten no responce. Pissing into the wind. Now may be a good time to ask if you wish to keep your heads down on stand on the front line of liberty. I am asking do you wish to use art to help heal a world going to tear itself appart with war, a world where the basic freedom that Americans have lived for and died for for centuries is being offered up without question? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: GUEST,bubble buster Date: 21 Sep 01 - 07:27 AM Hey Harpgirl, You are only partially correct in saying that Bush is not the people's choice. However, he was the choice of the people who know how to punch an election ballot correctly. And of course he appeared a bit macho, when was the last timne you met a Texan who wasn't? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: GUEST,just a nobody Date: 21 Sep 01 - 08:33 AM Thanks for starting the thread DougR.... I watched the speech. I thought he did a great job. His writers did a wonderful job to help him articulate what he wanted to get across and he did a damn good delivery. Did the speech get me nervous... hell yeah. I don't think anyone in their right mind wouldn't be nervous. We have drawn a line in the sand. Our Mililtary is mobilized, our demands made clearly with no room for interpritation. I was always wondering though, how would we keep groups from Ireland and England from falling under these catagories. I don't think Great Britain would be overlyjoyed to see our ships surrounding them. I liked the term "global reach" it did let people get an idea of what sort of groups we were going for. Bush touched on many topics that people have asked questions to on Mudcat... I hope that those that despise the republicans, hate bush, think he cheated his way into the whitehouse, Whatever negative feelings you have, can at least comb through the speech and pull from it a little more enlightenment about the situation we are in. Bush is not approaching this in a Ronold Rayguns kinda way. He acknowledges that the people are frightened, but asks that we be resolute. Asks that we stand and back our military. I think a good point that was made, Where I have seen so many say that Bin ladin wants this war. I tend to agree that he does not. In Bush's speech, the comment made that we do not need to isolate ourselves, to close ourselves off. When we do that then we have turned our backs on others, that do want our help, and then we would leave them in the mercy of groups like the Talbin and Bin Ladin. My question is, What would you prefer? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: GUEST,Stanley Wyatt, Baltimore Date: 21 Sep 01 - 09:37 AM I've been reading through these comments and in other thread topics pertaining to the terrorist massacre of September 11th. I lost a cousin and two friends in the WTC and my bitterness from reading these threads makes me wish it was Lepus Rex who was murdered by the terrorists instead of my cousin Andy Wilkie and my friends Jeff Hardy and Susan Russell. I have never been a fan of George W. Bush. In the 2000 election, I was a campaign worker for Ralph Nader. But last night, when President Bush spoke, he spoke for me. Stanley Wyatt Baltimore, MD |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Jack the Sailor Date: 21 Sep 01 - 09:49 AM I honestly do not know your definition of trolling. DougR in effect said that the only reason he started the thread was so that he could bait what he calls "liberals" Yes it is his right to express his opinions. But is it right for him to ask for mine so that he can ridicule it? That comes pretty close to some of the definitions of trolling which I have read here. I answered him in good faith expecting that he was actually asking my opinion. I was wrong. I will know better the next time. I'll probably just start my own thread as is my right. DougR in answer to your question. George made one of the best political speeches I have heard in my life. And I am old enough to have heard some good ones. He was well prepared, confident and articulate. For that you should be proud of him. I am still afraid. Why did he have to lie about the reasons for the attack. Who in the world is naive enough to believe that 19 ment would kill themselves because they are jealous of freedom and democracy? It harkens back to Regan's "Evil Empire" speech. America, this kind of talk make other countries worry about the sanity of the person saying it. BTW the way DougR from what I have read of your previous posts, I believe that I am more politically conservative than you. But being Canadian, my definition of liberal is not "one who dissagrees with Republicans."
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Kim C Date: 21 Sep 01 - 10:55 AM Some of you have already made up your minds about W and will never be swayed no matter what he does. I thought it was a good speech. A little frightening, yes, but frightening times call for frightening measures. Allie, last year we gave Afghanistan several million dollars' worth of humanitarian aid. Whether that aid ever got past the Taliban is anyone's guess. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Tedham Porterhouse Date: 21 Sep 01 - 10:56 AM No country in the world has provided more aid to Afghanistan than the U.S.A. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Troll Date: 21 Sep 01 - 11:12 AM Jack the Sailor, have you read bin Ladens Fatwa? If not, please do so. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: DougR Date: 21 Sep 01 - 01:14 PM Jack the Sailor, I regret that you viewed my post as trolling or flaming, but that's certainly your right. I do, at times, overlook the fact that the terms, "conservative" and "liberal," mean different things in other countries. I should keep that in mind because the Mudcat world is not just composed of Americans. I have not seen such a demonstration of bi-partisan support in America since WWII. I regret that we just don't seem to be able to accomplish the same feeling of solidarity on the Mudcat. I guess it's just not to be though. Thanks to all of you for posting your thoughts. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: DougR Date: 21 Sep 01 - 01:22 PM Jack the Sailor, I regret that you viewed my post as trolling or flaming, but that's certainly your right. I do, at times, overlook the fact that the terms, "conservative" and "liberal," mean different things in other countries. I should keep that in mind because the Mudcat world is not just composed of Americans. I have not seen such a demonstration of bi-partisan support in America since WWII. I regret that we just don't seem to be able to accomplish the same feeling of solidarity on the Mudcat. I guess it's just not to be though. Guest Stanley: I am sorry you lost your cousin and two friends in the WTC. I think you may have posted in anger because of that loss, and perhaps under the same circumstances, I might have reacted as you did. Lepus has been a member of the Mudcat for quite a spell, and as he noted, we rarely if ever agree. I certainly would not have wanted him to be a casualty of the WTC though. That's pretty tough statement you made, I think. Thanks to all of you for posting your thoughts. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: DougR Date: 21 Sep 01 - 01:25 PM Sorry for the double post. I failed to reply to the Dr. in original post. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Troll Date: 21 Sep 01 - 01:26 PM Doug! ENOUGH already! troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: GUEST Date: 21 Sep 01 - 01:33 PM Whoopie! He's gonna wipe out "Terra"! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: harpgirl Date: 21 Sep 01 - 01:41 PM Hey bubble butt! I assume you mean both male and female Texans are macho! While I'm thinking in this vein did it ever occur to anybody that the Taliban does not represent Afghani women? Would they condone the atrocities in New York City and Washington if they were truly free to say what they think? Would any truly Muslim woman condone such a bloodbath? We should defeat the Taliban in the interest of freeing Afghani women! The terrorists were also all men I noticed! And while I'm talking I might add that the most aggresive and in your face posters on this forum are men...harpgirl |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: GUEST,Bubble Buster Date: 21 Sep 01 - 02:06 PM Actually, Harpgirl, I was referring to male Texans as macho. That's because Texgirls, like all southern flowers, are too feminine to be macho, and they don't need to worry their pretty little minds about things like war. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: GUEST,Melani Date: 21 Sep 01 - 02:14 PM The speech wasn't as bad as I had feared. I was more interested in content than delivery, and it was a lot more balanced and sane than I had expected, though the characterization of the terrorists as hating freedom is a bunch of crap. That reference was designed to get Americans all fired up with patriotism, which will be necessary to get everyone behind a "war effort." Either these guys are religious fanatics that want to force their brand of Islam on the world, or they are angry over the U.S. support of Israel, sanctions on Iraq, etc., or maybe both, but I'm sure they don't give a flying you-know-what about our Constitution or national ideals. I agree that we may be balanced on the edge of WWIII. It will take some careful handling to avoid it, and I sure hope Colin Powell and Dick Cheney are up to it. If Dubya can become a decent speechmaking figurehead, that will be about the best I expect from him, and so far it looks good. I don't understand why you guys are always on about "trolling." You seem to be defining that term as expressing any opinion that somebody else is likely to disagree with. It is clear DougR and I have very different views, but I have never known him to be nasty about it, unlike, say, MAV or X-Ed. I personally have no problem with reasonably polite arguments--it gets really boring if we all agree. "Flaming" as I understand it, is being really nasty and calling people names. I have not seen anybody do that in this thread. Sometimes it seems that people are afraid of arguing, but I think that it's really possible to do that without getting nasty. A certain amount of passion adds spice, as long as it's not personal. I am still very reluctant to wave a flag; I am still afraid of mindless "patriotism." I am very much afraid that civil liberties may go down the tubes with a rush if we don't guard against it. We must be careful to make a distinction between actions that must be taken for security's sake and harrassment and profiling. I stopped into a fabric store last night and found that every scrap of red, white or blue ribbon had been sold, as well as every bit of American flag-patterned fabric, no matter how stupid-looking. I bought some rainbow ribbon for myself.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Amos Date: 21 Sep 01 - 02:17 PM Bubblebutt, your ass is grass, and harpgirl is a lawn mower!!! Harpgirl, I think you raise an excellent point. We have condemned the Taliban regime openly in the President's speech, among other things for the very abuses you are thinking of -- the brutality toward women, the arbitrary denial of civil freedoms, the repression of speech, not to mention the phsyical abuses. But we are not ordering them to reform their government. We are focusing here on terrorism. Since their protection of terrorists and their abuse of women are both rolled up in their minds with confused ideas about who Allah is and what wants, the two issues may unroll together, resulting in the Taliban and their radical ilk being ejected both by our saber-rattling and internal revolt led by outraged citizens. Wouldn't THAT be a step forward in a difficult time? (A burly, hard-hatted redneck leaps into the middle of the post waving a Scotch plaid colored thermos bottle and raising his middle finger in the general direction of the assembled clerics of Afganistan. He yells loudly in a distinctly Brooklyn accent: "Allah THIS, motherfuckers!!!".)
Honest, I get so sick of these stupid dramatizations pretending to speak from Infinity, when actually speaking from the dark places in the human anatomy.... A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Gary T Date: 21 Sep 01 - 02:50 PM BlueJay, "trolling" and "flaming" are not the same thing. Flaming, as Melani mentioned, typically uses scathing and incendiary language. I haven't seen any in this thread. Trolling is typically throwing out a provocative message (the bait) in the hopes that some people (the fish) will rise to it with emotionally charged responses. I haven't seen that in this thread either. Jack the Sailor, DougR's post does not constitute a troll. He was not trying to get people to make fools of themselves debating a loaded question. He was interested in your opinion, although not for the reason you might have hoped. DougR, I think you'll find that the "MD" in "Stanley Wyatt Baltimore, MD" stands for Maryland, not for Medical Doctor. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: harpgirl Date: 21 Sep 01 - 03:04 PM ...bubblebutt, dahling! You must be referring to Bonnie Parker, right? |
|
Subject: Bush's speech From: Jack the Sailor Date: 21 Sep 01 - 03:07 PM Sorry for the overreaction, I was expecting an honest conversation and didn't get it. I was extreemly fearfull and my adrealine took over my typing fingers. The BS in the title should have tipped me off. Americans, That speech had many undercurrents and hidden meanings. But utlimately it was a declaration of war on the present government of Afghanistan. Supporting your government doesn't mean you should stop thinking for yourselves. Remember the past, don't let your government make any major mistakes. Learn the point of view of your foreign friends and allies. Be vigilant. Please. God Bless America. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: harpgirl Date: 21 Sep 01 - 03:11 PM I think we should wage war on the present government of Afghanistan, in case anyone doesn't get that from what little I have said about this issue so far. I think we should FREE AFGHANI WOMEN!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Kim C Date: 21 Sep 01 - 04:03 PM I don't think it's necessarily a load of crap that the terrorists hate freedom/liberty/democracy. Look at it this way: if the US is the Great Satan, and the US loves freedom/liberty/democracy, then by hating the Great Satan, they also hate what the Great Satan stands for, which is freedom/liberty/democracy. Just a thought. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: kendall Date: 21 Sep 01 - 05:08 PM Kim C, that is really convoluted! I cant comment on the speech because I didn't hear it. I too cant stand the sight or the sound of that moron. However, I dont think either Doug or Troll mean to start trouble. Even though I disagree with them on all political matters, they strike me as being honest, decent, thoughtful and, unfortunately, wrong. No, they are not wrong, I have no right to say that. I do have the right to say I disagree with them. Troll, I have said repeatedly that I am a liberal, and I support the second amendment. Why dont you hear that? I have also said Clinton was a disgrace to the office, that I have voted republican in the past, that I sent a contribution to McCain, and you dont hear any of that. When has either of you two said anything good about a democrat? I dont recall if you have, and you both seem to support any republican. Come to think of it, that's what makes me a liberal. I'm not hidebound. One final word to you two, I'd have dinner or a beer with either of you, but stay away from politics. In my younger days, I could start a fight in an empty house! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Kim C Date: 21 Sep 01 - 05:12 PM Of course it's convoluted. Terrorists don't seem to me to be logical people. But it seems to me that if they don't like us, they also don't like the things we stand for, or the things we do. Maybe they don't like that the women in our country run around with their navels exposed. I dunno. Remember I already said I don't understand a bunch of this stuff anyway. :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: X-Ed Date: 21 Sep 01 - 05:20 PM To Jack the Sailor, your mind set is so unrealistic. No criminal ever listens to law. The idea that America asked for this ATTACK is as ridiculous as a black getting away w/ killing a white becaude the black was oppressed. Jr. was not my 1st choice as President, Harry Brown was. However the speech was impeccable for him. He seemed to be speaking from the heart. I saw him look at his notes only once. Anybody checkout teh attitude on Hillary? SHe is just such as selfinvolved...... eh! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Troll Date: 21 Sep 01 - 05:31 PM Kendall, I have said it once and I'll say it again, Bill Clinton is a MASTER Politician and highly adept at reading the public mood. Had it not been for his insatiable lust for power and his unfortunate inability to keep his trowsers zipped he might very well have gone down as a great president. The opportunities were certainly there. The most charitable thing I can say about Carter is that he makes an excellent ex-president. LBJ had a war and the burden of Camelot to deal with. I don't think he ever really had a chance. OK? BTW, I don't like the Republicans that much either. I lean toward Libertarian and I voted for Bugs Bunny in the last election. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Kim C Date: 21 Sep 01 - 05:40 PM What do you reckon ol' Bugs would do in this instance? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Walking Eagle Date: 21 Sep 01 - 06:05 PM Me? I went to see a man about a dog. *snicker*. No seriously folks, I was busy restringing an instrument. You know something about restringing? At first, the instrument acts ornery as hell, but then it eventually comes around. I'm not sure this war against terrorism will. What's my point? I'm too confused to know myself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Donuel Date: 21 Sep 01 - 06:12 PM I have no problem with bush holding up a badge during his speach. I would have liked to see a symbol of the fireman. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: SharonA Date: 21 Sep 01 - 06:33 PM I'm another who missed the speech. Spent longer than I expected getting my after-work shopping errands done, and got back in the car to turn on the radio just in time to hear him say, "Thank you". I'm with kat and GUEST: I hate listening to and watching the man speak, especially to Congress (look at TelePromptR on left side of aisle, look at center camera, look at TelePromptR on right side of aisle, look at center camera...) but the video clips that I've seen last night and this morning make me kinda think that, as WYSIWYG says, his speechmaking skills are improving. And the thought occurred to me, too, that his hopes for America's commitment to his war effort include the hope that he will be re-elected. Of course, the next coupla years will tell... if he and we live that long. I chatted with my co-worker this morning (the one whose best friend lost a son to the WTC attack) about Bush's delivery and speculated that he must have had some training in sermon delivery (citing as added proof the speech/sermon he gave last Friday at the national prayer service in DC). BTW, that co-worker of mine attended the Philadelphia Flyers-New York Rangers hockey game last night — or should I say the two-thirds of a hockey game — where the crowd insisted on watching the speech instead of allowing the third period of the game to commence. My friend was amazed at the experience: not only did Philly's hockey fans NOT want to watch hockey, but they also cheered the mayor of NYC and the governor of NY. I'm not sure that anyone outside the Philly area understands just how significant that is! My friend said that last night, Philadelphia truly was the City of Brotherly Love. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: DougR Date: 21 Sep 01 - 07:44 PM Jeeze, Kendall, I think I said something nice about Clinto in this very thread. He was, as Troll pointed out, a master politician and a super public speaker. I admire President Carter immensely. I think he is the epitome of what an ex-president should be. I don't personally dislike any democrat I can think of, I just don't agree with their political philosophy of the majority of them (there are conservative democrats too you know). When Barry Goldwater was first elected to office he never would have won the election without the support of conservative democrats. I know many democrats who I consider to be friends. One of them, though I have never met him, is Kendall Morse. DougR DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Greg F. Date: 21 Sep 01 - 08:40 PM I urge everyone to read Dubya's speech- several times. The text is easily available in lots of places. The empty platitudes and mindless assumptions and over-simplifications come across much more clearly in print. "Carrying a big dick"' as someone here has already said. So he was able to read what someone else had written for him off the teleprompter without screwing up too badly (not much he can do about the irrepressible smirk, apparently) but so what? We're still at the point where every time he manages to go to the bathroom without pissing on his shoes he gets universal accolades. WHY? The speech itself is just that- words. Lets wait and see what the administration actually DOES. Paul "Mad Dog" Wolfowitz is still performing his rendition of Randy Newman's "Lets Drop The Big One Now"- no point in just bombing Afghanistan back into the stone age- lets do Iran, Iraq & anyone else that pisses him off while we're at it! Tom Ridge's new Committee of State Security (soon to be re-named the People's Commissariat of State Security) is only getting started- who knows where the new secret police will take us? There's already talk in legal circles (and several articles) about courts being much more favorable towards Racial Profiling now- since we need to go after them nefarious A-Rabs! and more of the same to come. Terrorism may not be the only danger we're facing, folks- and if we're not careful it may turn out in the long run to be the lesser danger. Best, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Donuel Date: 21 Sep 01 - 09:27 PM My next door neighbor's first words out of his mouth after the attack was "Its the liberals who done this letting in all them furners , bringin this country down from within". All I could do was think of the inscription on the Staue of Liberty and leave him to grieve as all us must do in their own way.
Last Christmas I got one of those Hilshire Farms salami logs I knew I would never eat so I tossed it over the fence for his dogs. Awhile later he was complaining about other dogs and perhaps a neighbor that were inciting his dogs to howl and bark every night well past 3 AM. I told him as a musician I know exactly which dogs are doing the barking and that I have to sleep downstairs with the TV on to get some sleep. This evidently invited him to accuse me of trying to poison his dogs with a sausage and possibly poison the rabbits that he finds dead near his dog pen.
Should I escalate tensions and tell him that I do not discriminate between his dogs behavior and him? Should I deliver an ultimatum that he is either for me or against me?
As it turned out I found out what his favorite car was and I just happened to have a replica in the basement that I gave him for hiw birthday. Surley this man has legally killed fellow human beings. He has no relish for war and is not a meglomaniac to my knowledge.
You can finish the story any way you like by imagining the turn of events had I taken a tough stand or decided upon retalliation of some sort over something as simple as barking dogs and no sleep. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Ebbie Date: 21 Sep 01 - 09:38 PM I'm another who has trouble listening to the man. However, at Yahoo.com, they list the full text of the speech. There he says most of the things I want to hear- the call to nations to support the 'war' (hate that word) against terrorism, the necessity of recognizing that terrorism must be dealt with; he even sounded like he's become aware of the ambiguity of the proposed cat and mouse game. Unlike what he was saying before: "We will find them in their caves and smoke them out" (All I could see was the horrific pictures of the napalmed Viet Cong). He seems to have had recent briefings that laid out clearly for him some of the difficulties in the course he was proposing. Having said that, I think my operative thought is that he was briefed, that he was made to understand the impossibility of going with his gut instincts, not that he has suddenly become statesmanlike. MO But God, I wish him well. Because I wish us well... I hope that in the months and years to come we don't find it necessary to increase the misery of the people in so many cities and countrysides, and I hope we don't have to go through more destruction and sorrow at home. And all of it sounds too much to expect. But dropping bread across the countryside- ah, that I can support! It could be hard for the powers to convince the people with food in their hands of our demonic components. Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: GUEST,CLETUS Date: 21 Sep 01 - 09:39 PM Say thair Donnell ol buddy, iffen ya got ennymor uv them salamis, doan go awastin em on no dawgz. Me an Paw an the Reg Boyz kin takem offen yer handz an weed be rite happy bowt it. CLETUS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Troll Date: 21 Sep 01 - 11:31 PM OK Greg. Here's your chance.. Lets hear your plan -in detail- for handling this crisis. Please include any research or evidence that might back up your ideas. Try to avoid perjorative terms or inflamatory rhetoric. Please be specific and concise. Of course, if you have no plan...oh, but I'm sure you must troll. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: GUEST,Genie Date: 21 Sep 01 - 11:35 PM What Amos said. What ddw said.
But two things troubled me about the speech: |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: kendall Date: 22 Sep 01 - 12:03 AM Doug, Troll, to say that a man is an outstanding speaker, and a consumate politician is hardly praise! It's what's in a mans heart that counts not how well he bamboozles the public with well chosen words. Jimmy Carter was an ineffective president, but, a genuinely good man. Nixon was just the opposite. Besides, you conservatives should be grateful to Ted Kennedy. When he opposed Carter, he handed the presidency to Raygun. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Troll Date: 22 Sep 01 - 12:07 AM We are grateful to Ted Kennedy. We're grateful that he's a Democrat. He's such a marvelous bad example. troll (ducking and running for cover.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: kendall Date: 22 Sep 01 - 12:12 AM Didn't I say that in my PM to you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Troll Date: 22 Sep 01 - 12:18 AM Cross post. Of a sort. Great minds and all that. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: GUEST,CLETUS Date: 22 Sep 01 - 12:24 AM I reckon that beady-eyed an smirkin Bush feller mus be mitey interstin ta' yall, but I wuzza kinda wundrin if enny uv yall got one uv them salamis? Thet Donnel got me an Paw rite hungree. Yall kin go on a talkin, but we shur cud uze some salami. CLETUS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Troll Date: 22 Sep 01 - 12:45 AM Don't know 'bout salami, Cletus, but I know there's a liberal supply of boloney around here. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Amergin Date: 22 Sep 01 - 02:25 AM Just as there is a conservative supply... BTW I was the Guest who signed as NIT... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: CarolC Date: 22 Sep 01 - 02:38 AM troll,
You asked for alternative plans. I know you didn't ask me, but I figure, what the hell. I posted this in two posts adressed to someone on the thread called, "The Key to All US war strategy"...
GUEST, just a nobody... we do everything we possibly can to promote, protect, and preserve a coalition with as many countries in the world as we possibly can.
We work together with all of the countries in the coalition to come up with a plan to use diplomatic, law enforcement, and financial avenues to isolate and starve the organizations who are responsible for the terrorist attacks. This includes holding banks accountable for any help they give to terrorist organizations by sheltering money for them.
We make absolute sure that we do not do anything to destabilize any countries that have governments who are friendly to us or who are willing to help us.
We learn to work with other countries as equals instead of acting like a father figure to them and treating them like children.
If there is anything that is going to save the US, it will be for us to learn that we need the rest of the world, and we need their help as much as they need ours. If we fail to learn this lesson, I fear that we are in very big trouble.
The first and most important thing, in my opinion, is that at this moment in history, perhaps more than any other moment in history, we not only have the compassion and sympathy of much of the rest of the world, we also have their empathy. By that, I mean that they can, probably for the first time ever, see themselves in our shoes. This is very critical, and should not be wasted.
Because of this, they will very probably be willing to work with us and help us, as long as what we propose to do helps all of us. Most other countries probably won't have the burning desire or need for retribution that we have here. Most of them will probably be interested in solving the problem of terrorism, and no more. If we use our military might in a way that destabilizes countries that are crucial to this effort, at least one of which has nuclear weapons (Pakistan), the other countries in the coalition will probably recognize that they will not be helped in the long run by these military actions, that they may, in fact be hurt, and may remove themselves from the coalition.
I did a research paper about a year ago to find out what is the most powerful motivator for people. This was not research that originated with me. I was researching work that was done by others. What I found was that the most powerful motivator is what I would call "enlightened self-interest". By that I mean, people are motivated the most powerfully, and in the most lasting way when they understand how it is in their best interest to behave in a certain way. But what makes it enlightened self interest is the understanding of how what is in their best interest is also in the best interest of others. So, obviously I'm not talking about extortion. I mean people are motivated most powerfully by what is genuinely in their best interest.
If the US says, "You must do what we want or you will suffer in some way", that would be extortion. If we say, "We must work together to find a way to solve this problem in such a way that we all benefit", that would be motivating people through the use of enlightened self-interest.
Once we have built a coalition of willing participants that is based on the idea of enlightened self-interest, we determine what the benefits will be for all of the members of the coalition. The most obvious would be to protect all of us from terrorism. Even the banks will probably suffer in the long run if terrorism is allowed to destroy the economies of many of the richest nations on earth. So, even for the banks, there is an element of enlightened self-interest in helping to eliminate terrorism. In fact, it seems to me that there are probably very few groups, nations, or other interests who would benefit in the long run from allowing terrorism to continue or to flourish in the world.
If we put together such a coalition, we will need to identify what sort of actions would be detrimental to any of the members in the long run. One example of this would be if we caused, through military action in Afghanistan, destabilization in Pakistan resulting in an overthrow of the government now in place which is friendly to us at this time, by Muslim fundamentalists who are friendly with the Taliban. This, of course would be contrary to Pakistan's self-interest (as defined by the majority of people there at this time, which would likely change if we killed a lot of Afghanis), and it would also be contrary to our self-interest, because we would then have two enemies in the place of one, and one of them with nuclear weapons.
You see where I'm going with this. So we form a solid coalition. We work with the coalition as equals, rather than as an authority figure who says, "you're either for us or against us". Then, we put together the best minds that each of the countries in the coalition have at their disposal, and formulate plans to use the tools at our disposal to find out who the terrorists are, and how leverage might be applied to dry up whatever resources they have to help them to accomplish what they are trying to do. And whenever it is possible to, try to take into custody important figures within the terrorist organizations only if doing so does not put any member/countries of the coalition in jeopardy in any significant way. It seems to me that the most important thing we can do to the terrorists is to remove their sting. Even if they are still walking the streets, if they are perceived as ineffectual and weak by the starry eyed youths whom they would want to recruit, would anyone want to join them, much less give up their life for them? Take away the glory and there is no point in any of it. We don't take away the glory by killing them or making them glorified prisoners. We take away the glory by making them ineffectual. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Greg F. Date: 22 Sep 01 - 09:14 AM Take a deep breath, Troll- plenty of alternatives to the Dubya Rambo/Lone Ranger approach out there, some mentioned on this very forum, by smarter folks than me. Try doing what you suggest to others all the time- think! Why do you need me to think for ya? :>) Best, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: kendall Date: 22 Sep 01 - 09:44 AM Carol C, I dont often say, "Ditto" but, this time all I can say is "RIGHT ON THE MONEY" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Donuel Date: 22 Sep 01 - 10:29 AM A Global anti terrorist tribunal of the UN or Hague or Nurenburg with judges composed of Islams and the international community psossibly excluding the US Isreal and India should be established to hear the evidence from Interpole ,US etc. and hand down indictments. Carol , nothing sadly may erase the success in the starry eyes of new terrorist recruits. They have seen 2 Goliaths fall and will never forget or regret it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Greg F. Date: 22 Sep 01 - 10:40 AM CONTINUED HERE |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: Donuel Date: 22 Sep 01 - 12:30 PM Although Clinton could think on his feet while bush freezes I could not bear to listen to Clinton. FDR on the other hand was compelling.: We look forward to a world founded on four essential human freedoms. 1. The freedom of speech and expression for everyone everywhere in the world , 2 The freedom for every person to worship God in his own way everywhere in the world 3. The freedom of want everywhere in the world. The fourth is the freedom from fear any where in the world. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: SharonA Date: 22 Sep 01 - 04:11 PM Donuel (re The Four Freedoms): Number 3 should read "Freedom FROM want"... although I guess we should be free to want MORE, if we want, too (isn't that what capitalism is all about?). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Bush's speech From: GUEST,CLETUS Date: 22 Sep 01 - 04:36 PM Donuel, I shur am happy az ta ya postin them freedoms an specially that one about wantin an all cauze me an paw an the Reg boyz ar awantin one of them salamis. Iffen ya cud seez yur way kleer ta send it weed be much oblijed. CLETUS |