But I think he's done pretty well in this crisis.
Ok, I thought Blair's speech was more rousing.
Ok, I thought his phone call with Pataki and Giuliani seemed a bit rehearsed.
Kudos to George W. Bush. Among other things, for getting back to the White House at all yesterday. I don't know why people were criticizing him in the first place for taking his time to get there, but I was really surprised to learn he'd gotten back to D.C. Tuesday night.
Good luck, George.
Bush though, I couldn't tell. He could have been filled with quiet rage, or extrememely scared (both for what happened, and the fact that he has to resolve it), or something else. I don't think he was comfortable at all.
Would I prefer Clinton to be in charge? Yes? Am I going to slight Bush? Not unless he does something wrong. I'm not petty enough that I want him to cock up here. I want him to rise to the occassion. I want him to do what he must. I think he can. I hope he can. I don't envy his position all all.
BTW, you're absolutly right about him getting back to the White House. If there was the slightest doubt he was targetted, then he did the right thing by moving around. The last thing America needed was to lose it's leader.
[ September 13, 2001: Message edited by: PsyLiam ]
How he reacts in the coming days will set the pace for how the world reacts.
In my opinion , the current administration is perhaps the most suited for this. Bush is surrounded by smart people who have experiance with middle eastern affairs.
He can turn to his VP , Cheney , who has served in the goverment since the Nixon administration.
Next he has Colin Powell , a proven leader both in the military and political world. He has experiance in the Arab world from the Desert Storm Era.
These two are just some of the brain trust Bush has at his disposal.
quote:
this is Bush's Cuban Missle Crisis.
No, it's not.
Kennedy had to defuse a situation which could have resulted in the destruction of much of the United States. Thankfully, the situation was handled without a nuclear exchange.
Without the ability of this country to react to the possiblity of this major of an attack on the U.S., it has already happened, with bomb scares and other such terrorist related nightmares occuring across this nation since then.
While the potential for the Cuban missile crisis was much worse, the actuality of this event is much worse then anything any other sitting President has yet faced (with the very possible exception of FDR, who had to face an isolationist nation with an already collapsed economy, and gear her up for war) -- Bush already has a military, which is both lending humanitarian aid to New York (USNS Comfort set sail from Baltimore yesterday), and also deploying for a military response.
In many ways, Bush has it easier. In many ways, he has it worse.
[ September 13, 2001: Message edited by: MeGotBeer ]
i'm also not thrilled with this whole act of war thing. with terrorism, nothing is ever that easy, and this probably serves to inflame the public against the first enemy they perceive whether they are real or not (muslim americans in particular)
but overall, he's done pretty damn well, especially in the circumstances. giuliani and pataki too.
These situations are also similar in that they hit both Bush and JFK in the early stages of their adminstrations. Of course Bush has only been in office for around 8 months where as JFK had about a year and a half in by the time of the crisis.
I'd also have to say JFK was in "new ground" at the time , there was no playbook for how to deal with this kind of situation. Bush is also on "new ground" in my view.
These are trying times for a leader and my hopes are that we come out of this the best we can , smarter and ready.
Bush has said, rightly so, that seeing this event to its conclusion is now the focus of his administration. Let us hope that the neither the domestic side of policy nor civil liberties fall out of site in the prosecution of this 'war.'
I hope, I really do hope that he listens to his advisors and moves with measured steps toward some sort of resolution. A resolution that is within the core of ideals of democracy and freedom that the United States has always believed will make our nation what we've all want it to be...that City On The Hill.
[ September 13, 2001: Message edited by: Jay the Obscure ]
I am not awed by this president's response. I have grown weary of his platitude-filled speeches, his smirking face, and his general behavrior. I find him callous and shallow. As for his wife, I think I am coming to see why they got married. She is like him-callous and shallow. First Lady Bush had the mivonks to say that mothers should read to their children in this crisis.
I am, also, not happy with the actions of the Congress in regards to the public sessions in front of the Capitol and the prayer vigil. I feel that these moments were for pr, not for genuine support.
I have read of and seen the reactions of two Administrations and two Congresses, 1941 and 2001. I much prefer the 1941 government. After the attack on Pearl Harbor, they got to work and prepared the country for war. Hollywood worked the patriotic strings, not the Congress.
I think that we will have another strike by hate-mongers in the coming decades. This attack will be deadlier than the one we experienced on Tuesday. The reason for my feeling-even if we cause damage or destruction to these organizations, the hatred in their home countries is very strong agaisnt the US. We are possibly entering into a cycle that the Israelis have been fighting for decades-they strike and we strike. Where has this cycle taken Israel? Where will this cycle take our country?
The Administration, in their arrogance and parochial attitudes, have proven time and time again that they don't consider the consequences of their actions. Actions are taken out of reactionary impulses that estranged states and nations. I think very strongly that they will be incredibly arrogant and cause untold consequences for Americans in the future. God, I hope that I am wrong.
Agreed.
First Lady Bush had the mivonks to say that mothers should read to their children in this crisis.
Oh, you're talking about BUSH. Never mind, then.
As for that last one, you haven't spent much time around kids, have you? The children are probably scared, not to mention bored out of their little sculls with no TV to watch. Toss in the fact that you should be reading to your kids constantly anyway up to a certain age, and it's darned good advice.
The Administration, in their arrogance and parochial attitudes, have proven time and time again that they don't consider the consequences of their actions.
You seem to keep forgetting that BUSH is in office now, not Clinton.
Listen, people, Bush probably hasn't slept in three days. He's doing at least as well as anyone else would in his situation, and you apparently can't come up with any legitimate objections to what he's doing anyway, so give him a break, 'eh?
Omega is right.
*shoots*
Okay, now that is done with........
--
For all those who think Bush's response was not adequate, consider the following:
1) No one in the History of the Presidency has faced anything similar to what George W. Bush is facing. Sure, there were serious tragedies, but none like the one has recently happened.
2) Remember that Bush was in Washington to push forward the relief package to clean up this disaster as well as to counter terrorism. To him, this was probably not a time to dally around.
3) Bush is CRYING for gods sake. In today's newspaper, you can clearly see Bush's red eyes and an expression that shows he is just about to go to pieces. Again, no president has gone through what he is going through right now.
All you detractors, give him a break. Please. Like every one of us, he is only human, and he is trying to do the most human actions as possible to assist the Americans in this tragedy.
Let him do his job. Like Kardde, I am behind Bush all the way on this one.
Besides what Omega said, I'd like to add a little tidbit of my own.
I've mentioned before that I have a bit of an 'anger problem' (as has probably been obvious during the past few days).
I watched Bush's mannerisms very closely, and they're stiff and appear forcibly restrained... just like mine get when I'm about six seconds away from disembowling somebody who really deserves it.
Looks to me like dissociation... you take what you're REALLY feeling and cram it up in a little hidden compartment and lock it there until you can use it. Then you carry on.
I thank whatever gods there are that GORE isn't president. I can see it now...
"I helped BUILD the World Trade Center..."
"This dust from the debris is bad for the environment. We need new regulations against erecting buildings made from concrete" (Clinton sticks his head into frame: "Heh-heh... you said 'erecting'... heh-heh-heh.")
"I feel your pain."
"This is part of the vast right-wing conspiracy."
[ September 14, 2001: Message edited by: First of Two ]
I think it's quite justified to closely monitor how someone behaves when faced with this crisis. Thousands of people will be putting therapists' kids through college for years with post-traumatic stress disorders. Bush, being human, will be no different - but he has the added difficulty of having to be the one to do something about it all. Yes, such a situation has never been faced by another president, therefore we have no precedents for how a president is meant to behave. And no, it's not alright just to shrug it off by saying "well, Clinton/Gore/any other Democrat in history wouldn't have done any better!"
quote:
But you're a librarian. He has nuclear weapons. The worst we have to fear from you is a late-return fine.
Heh.
Keep in mind Ms. Laura was a Librarian once. I've been working on some proposals, like 'Three overdue notices, you're out' for scofflaws and the 'Library Stormtroopers' who come to your house and collect the overdue books, the fines, and whatever audiovisual equipment you happen to have (libraries are always in need of a/v stuff.) 
One cent an hour.
You people disgust me.
quote:
Suck programs would be local, not national.
I don't know anyone in the world besides you who would call their own plans "suck." And besides, isn't it big government regardless of whether the Federal Govm't does it or if a librarian with a dictatorship complex does it?
Actually, I'm surprised -- and, granted, hopeful -- by the liberal slant Bush has taken -- namely, Federal funds to the families of the victims. I don't think Bush'll run as a liberal next election, but, hey, he's getting there.
[ September 14, 2001: Message edited by: Malnurtured Snay ]
Although, I'm not saying that every state SHOULDN'T have a suck program... the problem is finding suitable volunteers to man.. er.. woman it. 
Anyway. no more anti-Gore statements from me. It's certainly a possibility that he could be handling this as well as Bush is.
But I'm glad I don't have to find out. I mean, after his LAST traumatic loss, the guy went into seclusion for eight months, and came back wearing that godawful beard! 
[ September 14, 2001: Message edited by: First of Two ]
Gore goes into seclusion, takes no attention what-so-ever from Bush, and Republicans scream and cry about what a lousy beard he has.
Could you guys at least be consistent in what you criticize people for ... ?
In my opinion, we don't know how well he's handling this. I've no doubt that the past several days have been spent putting people into positions in Afganistan and other countries, and such. But we haven't seen what his response is going to be, apart from declaring "a war on terroism", which is a vague, and utimately irrelevent thing to say.
Yes, he's done well by not immedietly bombing everywhere were people have beards, but I don't think we'll know how well he's done overall for a couple of days, after there has been an actual US response.
I'm holding off judgement until then.
Somethings seem scripted. The phone call between Pataki, Giuliani and Bush sounded scripted or rehearsed. This isn't neccessarily a bad thing, as it's important that the nation be unified (even if, like me, citizens don't particularly care for our Commander-in-Chief). I can't say whether or not the whole "Well, I can hear you!" thing was scripted or not, but it did it's job.
Again, these aren't criticisms of the way things are being handled, just observations.
I also believe if we do not strike with the full force of our might and bring fear into the hearts of our enemies, we are destined to relive the events of Sept 11, 2001. Only time will tell if Bush can handle the stress or not, I am one american that hopes he can.
God bless AMERICA!
quote:
don't know if Bush is doing a good job as of yet because he hasn't done anything, except maybe give a couple of speaches.
Well, like I said, so far the Federal gov't seems to be doing a good job figuring out who was responsible for this and assembling international support for any action which might happen. That said, yes, so far the ones we know to be doing an excellent job without doubt are Giuliani and Pataki. We'll discover in the coming days and weeks more of how Bush is doing handling the job.
quote:
We demand our freedoms based on a bill of rights that was written when we didn't have the technology we do today. I really hate those people that say I have they right to own an ozzie, just because of some amendment to the constitution that was written when they didn't even exist.
It's an "UZI." And its illegal in this country. This really isn't the thread for another gun-debate, although the question of how to interpret the Constitution is a heated one.
quote:
God bless AMERICA!
If that were true, these horrific events would not have unfolded.
quote:
I really hate those people that say I have they right to own an ozzie
I can't see why. It's in the Constitution, plain as day:
quote:
Being necessary for the development of a free and healthy metal community, the right to own Black Sabbath albums shall not be infringed.
One does wonder, though, about the people who want the right to own a harriet...