Does Bush really deserve all the bad press?

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 7:08 pm

I will say right out that I don't like Bush as a politician, he's probably an O.K. guy personally, but i will get that straight right off. But I was watching an interesting piece on Bush and antiamericanism in general on British T.V. and it made some very interesting points. One (which I think is true) is that for some reason there is something about George that just drives us Europeans mad, its his manner or something and interestingly enough Clinton was quite popular over here, maybe we just like the democrats cause they pretend to be nice to foreigners.

However, it was put forward that what we see as his weaknesses- like being too folksy, too religious, and doing the sort of "everyman, homer simpson" routine- many ordinary Americans connect with quite deeply and this has conributed to his not unconsiderable success as a politician. The main point is that we miss the substance of Bush because of his manner, and to be frank his problems when it comes to public speaking. So I was just wondering what other people from both sides of the atlantic think, not about his policies now (we all know how that argument is going to go), just the way he goes on himself. I suppose the alternate is how European politicians appear to Americans, though I expect the general concensus would be like a shower of shifty sissies. Ah well what can you do?.

LilacDragon · Post by **LilacDragon** » Tue Nov 01, 2005 7:38 pm

I have never and will never vote for a member of the Bush family. IMHO - YES, he deserves all the bad press.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:23 am

He has an annoying habit of grinning when he's under stress or is frustrated others don't get what he's talking about. It's apalling to see "thousands have died in this catastrophe." *grin* "Every day I think about Iraq ... every - day." *grin* etc.

I know he doesn't mean for it to come off this way, but it still annoys the **** out of me.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:30 am

SnoozeControl wrote: Chimps have that same mannerism.:yh_rotfl

alobar51 · Post by **alobar51** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:25 am

Galbally wrote: I will say right out that I don't like Bush as a politician, he's probably an O.K. guy personally, but i will get that straight right off. But I was watching an interesting piece on Bush and antiamericanism in general on British T.V. and it made some very interesting points. One (which I think is true) is that for some reason there is something about George that just drives us Europeans mad, its his manner or something and interestingly enough Clinton was quite popular over here, maybe we just like the democrats cause they pretend to be nice to foreigners.

However, it was put forward that what we see as his weaknesses- like being too folksy, too religious, and doing the sort of "everyman, homer simpson" routine- many ordinary Americans connect with quite deeply and this has conributed to his not unconsiderable success as a politician. The main point is that we miss the substance of Bush because of his manner, and to be frank his problems when it comes to public speaking. So I was just wondering what other people from both sides of the atlantic think, not about his policies now (we all know how that argument is going to go), just the way he goes on himself. I suppose the alternate is how European politicians appear to Americans, though I expect the general concensus would be like a shower of shifty sissies. Ah well what can you do?.

Interesting points.

Prince Charles was on 60 Minutes here last week. They mentioned that previous Crown Princes have historically been "layabouts and playboys". They then went on to list this Prince's resume, where he is genuinely trying to do things with a largely ceremonial position that will make the world a little better.

I came away from that interview with a very different take on the guy. For the first time, I saw a good person, not some stiff icon, who cares deeply about humanity. Did I get that wrong???

As for our guy, he has a 39% approval rating. A recent poll showed that if an election were held today 2 out of 10 would vote for him. 1 of 10 Black people support him.

He connects with a very small, but highly organized minority. He was reelected with the smallest margin of victory in history for a sitting president during wartime.

He has galvinized public opinion and driven a wedge between us that hasn't been experienced since the civil war.

His "folksy" manner is seen by most as superficial, and he is seen as the arrogant, disconnected, weak, rich kid who's had everything handed to him. He's been a failure at everything he's ever done, and he's failing monumentally now. His families' total disregard for those less fortunate was recently manifested by comments his mother made in the wake of hurricane Katrina, that got played ad nauseum on TV.

What happened here was that some very clever marketers sold an image, pushing the fear/security hot buttons to perfection.

Shame on us for buying it.

greydeadhead · Post by **greydeadhead** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 10:00 am

Personally I don't like him.. and he is not exactly a fantastic leader..

but polls are created so the results can be spun the way you want them.. it just depends on which point of view you want to emphasis..

As far as driving a wedge.. both parties are gulity of partisan politics.. the era of bipartisanship and working for the good of the people disappeared long ago. Neither party is innocent in this issue..

and face it. .Politics and campaigns are marketing.. no matter what party you support.. Politicians are handled, told what to say, when to smile, and when they lose.. are told who to blame..

hotsauce · Post by **hotsauce** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:40 pm

ummm...yes, he does!

BabyRider · Post by **BabyRider** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 1:47 pm

What....am I the only Republican here?

I doubt there is a leader anywhere, in any position that has not had to bear the brunt of criticism for some thing or another. We expect a lot of our elected leaders, mainly because we are the ones who put them where they are.

GWB is not perfect. He's human. There are things about him I don't like, there are things about him I do. With everything that has happened to this country and the entire world in the past few years, it's not surprising that he gets the bad press he does. And since humans have a serious need to place blame when things go wrong, and GWB is the leader of the most powerful nation in the world, it makes sense that he's where lots of people will place that blame. Is it all deserved? Not by a long shot.

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:26 pm

OK this is going the way I thought it would, what I find interesting is that so many people just seem to dislike Bush just because of his whole demeanor, non political people who couldn't give a crap about politics. I think over here we have an excuse because we're not Americans and we just don't get where the guy is coming from, but it seems to be true in America too.

I know lots of people didn't like Clinton cause they thought he was smarmy (like Blair in Britain), but I think this is a bit different. People just dismiss Bush as an idiot and a waster who got lucky cause of his dad. Maybe there is some truth in it, I don't really know, but its the way thay these people get percieved that interests me. Here's a questions for people from America, how is Tony Blair percieved over there?

BabyRider · Post by **BabyRider** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:43 pm

Galbally wrote:

I know lots of people didn't like Clinton cause they thought he was smarmy
People didn't like Clinton because he was a criminal, lying sack of sh!t who couldn't keep his pants zipped and had the IQ of a dyslexic gnat and the personality of a venereal disease.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:52 pm

Galbally wrote: OK this is going the way I thought it would, what I find interesting is that so many people just seem to dislike Bush just because of his whole demeanor, non political people who couldn't give a crap about politics. I think over here we have an excuse because we're not Americans and we just don't get where the guy is coming from, but it seems to be true in America too.
I never said one way or another what I thought about the man or the President. I simply answered your question about his manner. Wasn't that what you were getting at?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 7:42 pm

SnoozeControl wrote: Tony Blair is attractive, well spoken and seems very sincere. I wouldn't trust him any further than I could throw him, however. He is a politician.
Yep! Yep! Yep! Yep! Yep! Yep! Yep! Uh-huh! Uh-huh! Uh-huh!

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 7:58 pm

Accountable wrote: I never said one way or another what I thought about the man or the President. I simply answered your question about his manner. Wasn't that what you were getting at?

Yeah you did, so someone else too, I should have qualified that, sorry.

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:04 pm

SnoozeControl wrote: Tony Blair is attractive, well spoken and seems very sincere. I wouldn't trust him any further than I could throw him, however. He is a politician..

That true of them all, for me I don't care whether I trust them, or even if they are likeable at all, its whether I agree with their goals, and more importantly if I judge that they are cabable of fulfilling that agenda. In fact any politician that ask me to vote for him based on his trustworthyness would immeadiately be off the card as I don't like being patronized.

BabyRider · Post by **BabyRider** » Wed Nov 02, 2005 9:51 pm

TW2005 wrote: It's kind of funny to me how the Republicans always come back to that situation. So he got his little wanker sucked on..... anything else more substantial to talk about?
Oh goody, you're back....

"Getting his little wanker sucked on" is pretty substantial in my book. If you can't trust a man to honor his wedding vows, do you really want to trust him to run this country? I sure don't.

I suppose you're a Clinton fan? What, he got a BJ and you're jealous?

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:09 am

TW2005 wrote: It's kind of funny to me how the Republicans always come back to that situation. So he got his little wanker sucked on..... anything else more substantial to talk about?

Right, now I have found out something interesting, you call the president's "special area" his wanker? Is this on purpose or is it a misinterpretation of what we call a wanker? Which is a serial masturbater who is unable to stop, even to have his tea? For us Clinton could be a "Wanker" but you couldn't suck his wanker. Politics is truly fascinating, isn't it people.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:13 am

TW2005 wrote: It's kind of funny to me how the Republicans always come back to that situation. So he got his little wanker sucked on..... anything else more substantial to talk about?Apparently you have no inkling for the power of a leadership position. If even the person in that position has zero respect - possibly even contempt - for the office, it takes away credibility for all who support it. And those who hold that office have to work extra hard to restore that credibility. It took Reagan to partially rebuild what everyone from Nixon to Carter had destroyed, then Clinton dragged it right back down again.

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:36 am

I don't like getting into debate about American politics, cause I'm not an American, logically enough. But what would you find more disturbing. A man who used his position to have a dirty weekend with an intern, or a man who uses his position to start a meaningless war, based on a false premise, that has cost thousands of lives for no observable benefit to his country's interests? I know what I think.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:53 am

Galbally wrote: I don't like getting into debate about American politics, cause I'm not an American, logically enough. But what would you find more disturbing. A man who used his position to have a dirty weekend with an intern, or a man who uses his position to start a meaningless war, based on a false premise, that has cost thousands of lives for no observable benefit to his country's interests? I know what I think.So do we. :wah:

LilacDragon · Post by **LilacDragon** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 7:07 am

What I find disturbing is that Clinton was impeached for a stain on a blue dress and George seems to be able to do what he wants, lie about he wants and follow his own personal agenda with impunity.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 8:26 pm

TW2005 wrote: Right that's why Bush has the lowest ever approval rating. Looks like someone did better in dragging the "credibility" issue down.
I missed you too dear. I'd tell you how that makes no sense in the context, but I see that irritates you. :-6

BabyRider · Post by **BabyRider** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 8:37 pm

TW2005 wrote: I thought that you'd miss me BR. So invading a Country on false pretenses is ok? What's worse? If you think that someone lying about a matter of infedelity is worse than murdering thousands of your own citizens and near 100,000 of innocent people you are trying to save, you have problems. Do you really trust Bush to run this country? His whole administration is under indictments right now. But I suppose you still trust him because he is faithful to his wife? Killing people for false reasons is worse in my book.
I was kinda happy to see you back till I saw the sanctimonious post. You and I have never agreed on politics, though, so I'm not sure why I expected any different.

That's why I won't get drawn into this debate with you.

Jives · Post by **Jives** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 8:54 pm

This must be the thread where you and I agreed, TW. I read the book, "House of Bush, House of Saud". After that I was convinced that Bush was the AntiChrist.

And too bad BR and TW aren't going after it. That's some of the best posting around, usually.

Oh, and watch the "wanker" stuff, Bal. I post from a school computer, you'll get this site banned by my tech guys.

BabyRider · Post by **BabyRider** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 9:18 pm

Jives wrote:

And too bad BR and TW aren't going after it. That's some of the best posting around, usually.
Not when it comes to politics, Jives!! Maybe our ol buddy will stumble into one of the PC threads running amok around here lately. :yh_bigsmi

LilacDragon · Post by **LilacDragon** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 9:26 pm

To be quite honest, I really don't care about the bedroom habits of my politicians. They seem to be a group on the whole who are self important and have HUGE egos that need stroking in whatever way possible. I am more concerned about how my politicians deal with the larger issues.

Clinton tried to do several things that would have been good for our country, but everyone was too busy worrying about the whole Monica thing. Of course he lied about it! I have never met a man who, when caught, admitted to having an affair.

I would much rather a man lied about an affair then lied about weapons of mass destruction! Nobody was physically hurt by that blue dress, but over a thousand U.S. troops and an untold number of Iraqi citizens have died because of those supposed weapons.

Sorry, if GW said that the sky was blue, I would have to go and look out the window to make sure.

LilacDragon · Post by **LilacDragon** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 9:36 pm

SnoozeControl wrote: BTW, where exactly is Bin Ladin?

Who knows? But Marines are dying trying to find him.

BabyRider · Post by **BabyRider** » Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:00 pm

LilacDragon wrote:

Clinton tried to do several things that would have been good for our country, but everyone was too busy worrying about the whole Monica thing. Of course he lied about it! I have never met a man who, when caught, admitted to having an affair.
I find it deeply, deeply disturbing that people are so willing to forgive indiscretions like this. It's a part of what is so damn wrong with the fabric of our society. Marriage vows have no meaning and people are willing to overlook it when our LEADER, of all people, tramples them without a thought.

"Ho-hum, oh well, just another man, sticking his willy where it doesn't belong. It's what they DO after all."

It's repulsive, really. And it's also not the only thing he lied about.

BabyRider · Post by **BabyRider** » Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:17 am

SnoozeControl wrote: I was in the military. Do you deny my right to serve my country because I'm female? How does a gay man differ from a hetero male in time of war?
I'm gonna regret getting into this aspect of this conversation, but I have to ask: in what capacity did you serve, Snooze?

(Yes, I'm going to ignore the second question in your post for now. :yh_bigsmi )