I think he's great to listen to. Just can't wait for that next ignorant doozy to slip out of his speak hole. I can only imagine his speech writers shudder everytime he starts to talk.
Direct connection and relationship aren't the exact same thing. There can be a relationship between two people who never speak to eachother in their lives if they have the same attitude and the same enemy.
I'm glad I don't have to give speeches to millions/billions of people who are waiting to scrutinize every word, especially if I read it wrongly. I'm a terrible public speaker. I've tried giving speeches in class and though I passed, I probably sounded a lot like the president. I'm not saying I'm not an idiot, but I don't think he's any dumber than I am. None of us know what it's like to have a job like that. President.
Please pardon my pseudo-intellectuaphilisophicalismysiticality.
Bush's inability to string a sentence together is one of his saving graces. Makes him look like a regular Joe, honest, struggling, trying hard to do the right thing. Total BS, of course.
The budget may be bursting at the seams, and our troops may be dying slowly, but most of them are proud to be doing what they're doing.
Bush obviousely under estimated the insurgency, but the insurgency also underestimated our patience. If everyone like you had their way the insurgency would win. So ask yourself, and be honest with yourself, what if we stayed long enough to win?
And by win I mean weaken the insurgancy enough so that Iraq can defend it's self.
That's the goal. Perhaps reaching that goal is a matter of attitude. Are you an American or an American't?
First, they are proud of serving their country, not fighting a war in which the majority of them fail to see any good reason for.
Secondly, as h@ts put it, it took 10yrs of the same thing for the Soviets to get out of Afghanistan, what makes you think these insurgents underestimated the US when they have already proven to have longevity in fighting this type of war? How long you think we should stay there sustaining this type of budget? The Soviets went bankrupt trying to fight a “Sovi-can” war until they realized that they “Sovi-couldn’t”.
Furthermore, why is it that I have to be a cheerleader in order to be Ameri”can”? If we fail, will you blame the “American’ts” for the failure or lay the failures squarely on those responsible?
quote:
Direct connection and relationship aren't the exact same thing. There can be a relationship between two people who never speak to eachother in their lives if they have the same attitude and the same enemy.
Finally, if this summation you just rendered is true, then why did Bush mention it? Was he trying to bolster his case for invading or he was just being rhetorical? And if they didn’t have a “direct connection” then he had no business putting it in his speech because it constituted no grounds for an imminent attack.
Do you see it as your patriotic duty to believe everything the President says, despite him being perhaps the biggest BSer America has ever had the misfortuen to have as president?
HECK! said this in post #15 : I remember hearing this administration say it wouldn't take long and wouldn't cost a lot of money. Chalk that up with all the other fluff we've come to expect.
Nope I don't think so.
quote:
And now a special guest, the President:
"First, just if I might correct a misperception. I don't think we ever said -- at least I know I didn't say that there was a direct connection between September the 11th and Saddam Hussein. We did say that he was a state sponsor of terror -- by the way, not declared a state sponsor of terror by me, but declared by other administrations. We also did say that Zarqawi, the man who is now wreaking havoc and killing innocent life, was in Iraq. And so the state sponsor of terror was a declaration by a previous administration. But I don't want to be argumentative, but I was very careful never to say that Saddam Hussein ordered the attacks on America."
-President George W. Bush, Mar. 20, 2006
"The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and Al Qaeda, because there was a relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda."
-President George W. Bush, Jun. 17, 2004
---------
-HECK!
Good find there which says that he said the same thing in 2004 and 2006. Which is what I said he said all along. There is nothing that says the Iraq and Saddam had anything to do with 9/11. But Saddam did have ties to Terrorist and Al Qaeda.
Sayzak said this in post #21 : Direct connection and relationship aren't the exact same thing. There can be a relationship between two people who never speak to eachother in their lives if they have the same attitude and the same enemy.
Huh!!!!!????
From Websters
re·la·tion·ship ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-lshn-shp)
n.
The condition or fact of being related; connection or association.
quote:
I'm glad I don't have to give speeches to millions/billions of people who are waiting to scrutinize every word, especially if I read it wrongly. I'm a terrible public speaker. I've tried giving speeches in class and though I passed, I probably sounded a lot like the president. I'm not saying I'm not an idiot, but I don't think he's any dumber than I am. None of us know what it's like to have a job like that. President.
It is a find indeed. Self-serving doubletalk, lies and plausible deniability and it appears to have fallen on deaf ears.
"A harmless hilarity and a buoyant cheerfulness are not infrequent concomitants of genius; and we are never more deceived than when we mistake gravity for greatness, solemnity for science, and pomposity for erudition." -Charles Caleb Colton
06-29-2006 05:38 PM
