| Author |
Message |
    
ligeti
Citizen
Username: Ligeti
Post Number: 73
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 7:17 am: |     |
"It's important for people to understand the context in which I made a decision in the Oval Office," Mr. Bush said. "I'm dealing with a world in which we have gotten struck by terrorists with airplanes, and we get intelligence saying that, you know, we want to harm America. And the worst nightmare scenario for any president is to realize that these kind of terrorist networks have the capacity to arm up with some of these deadly weapons, and they strike us."
|
Sylad
Citizen
Username: Sylad
Post Number: 205
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 8:27 am: | |
I have the interview on Tivo and plan to watch it tonight, I have only seen about 15 minutes. So what does everyone think? I will let you know what I think after I watch it. |
Duncan
Citizen
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 1510
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 8:51 am: | |
I would donate my time to teach that man something about public extemporaneous (Though the questions were no surprises to him I would guess) speech. Good lord he sounds like an idiot when he is not following a script. And even then....
This is not a political post, though I would have to say some of the things he has done are idiotic 
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take"
Wayne Gretzky |
bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 4587
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 8:57 am: | |
I caught most of this live yesterday morning. I was feeling a little out of sorts and detached. I viewed the show from the point of view of an astronaut returning after a three year trip to Mars or a contestant on the “Special Long Term Survivors, the Collectors Edition”. Looking at it that way I saw a President who:
1. Allowed the World Trade Center and the Pentagon to be attacked with the loss of over 3,000 lives.
2. Attacked a foreign country based on faulty intelligence.
3. Whose military records have been conveniently lost.
4. Who has presided over a very long and nasty recession
5. Who lost over 2,00,000 jobs
6. Whose budget plans will eventually lead to a 50% tax increase or a 50% service decrease to pay for the debt per the Congressional Budget Office and who essentially said he didn’t believe the numbers.
Later in the day I watched a few cable news shows and was subjected to “The Attack of the Stepford Politicians” who all supported every point Bush tried to make using the exact same language including my favorite, “..but, Kay said Iraq was more dangerous than he thought…”. Nothing like getting those talking points papers out quickly.
|
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 2843
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 9:43 am: | |
Q. Which "Bush-hater" wrote this:
quote:You can find the transcript of the Bush-Russert interview all over the Web. It reads better than it played. But six million people saw it, and many millions more will see pieces of it, and they will not be the pieces in which Mr. Bush looks good.
The president seemed tired, unsure and often bumbling. His answers were repetitive, and when he tried to clarify them he tended to make them worse. He did not seem prepared. He seemed in some way disconnected from the event. When he was thrown the semisoftball question on his National Guard experience--he's been thrown this question for 10 years now--he spoke in a way that seemed detached. "It's politics." Well yes, we know that. Tell us more.
A. Reagan speechwriter, WSJ columnist and all-around conservative pundit Peggy Noonan. |
gozerbrown
Citizen
Username: Gozerbrown
Post Number: 337
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 10:09 am: | |
Isn't this why the Soapbox Politics thread was created? |
Dave
Citizen
Username: Dave
Post Number: 6347
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 10:15 am: | |
Yes, I'm going to move it there this afternoon. |
court07040
Citizen
Username: Court07040
Post Number: 36
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 11:42 am: | |
(quote) Allowed the World Trade Center and the Pentagon to be attacked with the loss of over 3,000 lives.
Are you kidding? I suppose Roosevelt allowed pearl harbor to be attacked, too, since he happened to be president at the time.
|
bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 4591
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 12:06 pm: | |
Court, there is a whole school of revisionist history that has FDR knowing about Pearl Harbor in advance and not warning Admiral Kimmel. I don't buy it, but to a great degree FDR and his Admirals and Generals should have taken more precautions, making him at least partially responsible for what happened.
I am not saying that Bush was in cahoots with Bin Laden. However, as the sign on Harry Truman's desk said, "The Buck Stops Here".
And yeah, I could have phrased my one liner better and more fairly.
|
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 863
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 12:18 pm: | |
His appearance stunk. Reminded me of 1992, where supporters can argue the candidate's position better than he can.
We've learned that Kerry received cash for speaking to special interest groups today. Yesterday, we learned why Bush did not. Ugh. |
twig
Citizen
Username: Twig
Post Number: 95
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 2:03 pm: | |
Isn't this pretty much a case of "some old, same old"? Those who dislike Bush see his appearance on MTP as being the disaster they expected it to be and those who support Bush feel that he effectively made his points. Did anyone out there really change his/her mind as a result of the interview. Who listened with an open mind? |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 1935
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 2:24 pm: | |
How can you say that, after reading Peggy Noonan (WSJ Editorial writer, Reagan speechwriter), as well as our own cjc right here, express their disappointment? |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 867
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 2:56 pm: | |
I only plead guilty to thinking Bush performed poorly. His substance -- when and what he could muster -- was fine. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 1936
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 3:04 pm: | |
Understood. I'm trying to just focus on the narrow point of "effectiveness."
Despite my own feelings about Bush and his policies, I don't think the country particularly benefits from him appearing confused, weak and inarticulate. |
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 2054
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 3:12 pm: | |
So tom, if it's bad for the country to appear confused, weak and inarticulate, wouldn't that also justify the way he has pretty much put an end to press conferences?
Isn't that like the kid who misbehaved not telling his parents of his wrongdoing because it would hurt them too much?
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
There is nothing
|
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 868
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 3:34 pm: | |
I don't think he was particularly weak -- outside of his performance. I think the world knows Bush will blow their asses away if they threaten the US. I think the world knows he won't cut and run aka Somalia. Europe (we're talking Old Europe), they've gone back to resenting the US just as they always have, as they watch their deficits start to surpass ours in relative size to economies.
As for his lack of press conferences, that's understandable. He didn't really do them when he was 'up' or 'down' for lack of a better word, as it's genetically hostile territory and not much use. He can get his message and policies out without facing Terry Moran or Helen Thomas and other biased hacks in journalism. He's only going to sit for the biggest and most credible, of which Russert is certainly one, and only when he feels he has to do it. |
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 2057
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 3:42 pm: | |
cjc, it's funny, because your descriptions of Bush's positions are his strengths, as you see it, but they are his weaknesses, as I see it. So in a way, you're right, the interview didn't really tarnish his image or his position.
As for press conferences, I also agree. He doesn't gain much from them. But the reason I'm annoyed about his refusal is not that he would gain or lose from them. It's that the public is entitled to hear from the president. And the public is entitled to be heard. The press is antagonistic to the president because it's the press's job to be so, to a good extent. They should be questioning the president's judgement. If they do so and the president ends up looking like he has made the right choices, everyone wins. If they question his judgement and he ends up looking bad (or heaven forbid, changing his mind) that's a win, too.
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
There is nothing
|
Dave
Citizen
Username: Dave
Post Number: 6348
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 4:07 pm: | |
Topic moved from Soapbox -> Soapbox: All Politics |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 1937
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 4:09 pm: | |
Well the president has to appear; and if the only way he can appear is looking confused and inarticulate, then we need to find a new one. |
drewdix
Citizen
Username: Drewdix
Post Number: 476
Registered: 7-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 5:12 pm: | |
"genetically hostile territory"
Just wanted to post that again.
You can try and dismiss the "hacks" all you want, but sad truth is he'd get his message out infinitely better if he COULD face Terry Moran or Helen Thomas in remotely coherent fashion.
But great; we'll kill you if you look at us sideways, and Europe always sucked anyway (who needs 'em).
That forgives the fact that my president is depressingly inarticulate and has no grasp on any other issue.
I think this hurt him. |
Dave
Citizen
Username: Dave
Post Number: 6351
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 5:26 pm: | |
I only saw the first 30 minutes of the interview, but I thought Bush did ok. Then again, my expectations weren't that high. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 1938
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 5:42 pm: | |
Raise your expectations. Think about JFK, or if you prefer, early Reagan ("this is my microphone...")
Now how'd he do? |
Ukealalio
Citizen
Username: Ukealalio
Post Number: 435
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 6:14 pm: | |
Since when did we start thinking having an inarticulate President is OK?."Yea but he'll kick butt". Is this the level we have stooped to ?.
Very sad. |
Insite
Citizen
Username: Insite
Post Number: 224
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 6:21 pm: | |
boring |
Dave
Citizen
Username: Dave
Post Number: 6352
Registered: 4-1998
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 6:29 pm: | |
Yeah, Bush is boring, too. |
tjohn
Citizen
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 2221
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 6:52 pm: | |
Bobk,
"The Buck Stops Here" is so 50's. If Bush understood what that phrase meant, he wouldn't be calling for a special investigation of his own Executive Branch. He would have a grasp of the situation and would be relieving people of their duty where necessary.
Of course, the fact that he is preemptively standing behind Tenet suggests that the CIA provided a half decent assessment and the Bush Administration cooked the truth to sell their invasion of Iraq. |
bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 4600
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 7:13 pm: | |
The nice answer on Tenet is that Bush is loyal to his underlings. The not so nice area is that he doesn't want Tenet writing a book.  |
Ukealalio
Citizen
Username: Ukealalio
Post Number: 436
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 10:34 pm: | |
This common retort, "Boring", I find it very ammusing that anyone with anything wortwhile to say would resort to this. It's kind of like replying,"Tough Titty" to something you didn't understand or couldn't grasp in the 5th grade.
If, "words are weapons",Boring is akin to using a pea shooter with a hole in it and a wet flacid spitball as your projectile. Your debating skills are on par with "your" Presidents, un-coached/rehearsed interview skills. |
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 2060
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Monday, February 9, 2004 - 11:04 pm: | |
Yeah, it seems like a cop-out, for people who sense, perhaps subconsciously, that they can't win a given debate.
Or perhaps it's just a way of getting in the thread so it gets emailed to them henceforth.
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
There is nothing
|
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 870
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 8:57 am: | |
As far as "getting your message out" -- you don't need to do it through a WH press conference or in the out-of-touch Beltway. If you're good at the ju-jitsu with hacks like Moran and Thomas, fine. But not everyone is. Frankly, I'd argue against it.
Reagan did his over the heads of the media, right to the American people. That's how he won despite the daily drubbing the press gave him for being stupid, uncaring, divisive, etc (boy, how things change). Bush got out of DC and is traveling now to speak directly to the people, and from what I saw on cable, he was quite good.
The public isn't entitled to anything in the way of press conferences, or even a speech. I wouldn't suggest not speaking to the American people, but the only thing he's legally required to do is a State of the Union.
|
Insite
Citizen
Username: Insite
Post Number: 225
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 9:04 am: | |
or I can just Tom Reingold and make a post for no reason. |
Sylad
Citizen
Username: Sylad
Post Number: 207
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 9:11 am: | |
Last night I watched the whole interview, I watched a few parts multiple times, thanks to my Tivo. To me he seemed honest, unrehearsed and determined. I voted for him in 2000 and if the election were today I would vote for him. Like or dislike him, you have to give him credit for standing by his decision and taking accountability. He is not politicking and trying to pass the buck or point the finger. He made decisions and stands by these decisions. Given the world we live in I think he is the best choice. This election is probably the most important for our country in the last 25 years maybe even the last 40 years. He is a strong leader; he has a very strong team. His economic, foreign policy vision are critical for our future. Post 9/11, it is a much different world. We need the resolve and committment that President Bush and his team has brought.
I also think that it is important for everyone to read the full David Kay report.
Here are a few statements from the MTP interview that will make a lasting impression on me.
Regarding Iraq and WMD
“And the American people need to know they got a president who sees the world the way it is. And I see dangers that exist, and it's important for us to deal with them”
“There's a — I know there is a lot of focus on Iraq, and there should be, but we’ve got thousands of troops, agents, allies on the hunt, and we’re doing a pretty good job of dismantling al-Qaida — better than a pretty good job, a very good job. I keep saying in my speeches, two-thirds of known al-Qaida leaders have been captured or killed, and that's the truth”
”Yes. First of all, I expected to find the weapons. Sitting behind this desk making a very difficult decision of war and peace, and I based my decision on the best intelligence possible, intelligence that had been gathered over the years, intelligence that not only our analysts thought was valid but analysts from other countries thought were valid. And I made a decision based upon that intelligence in the context of the war against terror. In other words, we were attacked, and therefore every threat had to be reanalyzed. Every threat had to be looked at. Every potential harm to America had to be judged in the context of this war on terror. And I made the decision, obviously, to take our case to the international community in the hopes that we could do this — achieve a disarmament of Saddam Hussein peacefully”
“But David Kay did report to the American people that Saddam had the capacity to make weapons. Saddam Hussein was dangerous with weapons. Saddam Hussein was dangerous with the ability to make weapons. He was a dangerous man in the dangerous part of the world”
“And I made the decision to go to the United Nations. By the way, quoting a lot of their data — in other words, this is unaccounted for stockpiles that you thought he had because I don't think America can stand by and hope for the best from a madman, and I believe it is essential — I believe it is essential — that when we see a threat, we deal with those threats before they become imminent. It's too late if they become imminent. It's too late in this new kind of war, and so that's why I made the decision I made”
“There was no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein was a danger to America. No doubt”
“I went to Congress with the same intelligence — Congress saw the same intelligence I had, and they looked at exactly what I looked at, and they made an informed judgment based upon the information that I had. The same information, by the way, that my predecessor had. And all of us, you know, made this judgment that Saddam Hussein needed to be removed”
” You remember U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441 clearly stated “show us your arms and destroy them, or your programs and destroy them.” And we said, “There are serious consequences if you don't” and that was a unanimous verdict. In other words, the worlds of the U.N. Security Council said we're unanimous and you're a danger. So, it wasn't just me and the United States. The world thought he was dangerous and needed to be disarmed”
” And by the way, by clearly stating policy, whether it be in Afghanistan or stating the policy that we expect you, Mr. Saddam Hussein, to disarm, your choice to disarm, but if you don't, there will be serious consequences in following through, it has had positive effects in the world. Libya, for example, there was an positive effect in Libya where Moammar Khaddafy voluntarily disclosed his weapons programs and agreed to dismantle — dismantle them, and the world is a better place as a result of that”
“A free Iraq will change the world. It's historic times. A free Iraq will make it easier for other children in our own country to grow up in a safer world because in the Middle East is where you find the hatred and violence that enables the enemy to recruit its killers”
“I've got a foreign policy that is one that believes America has a responsibility in this world to lead, a responsibility to lead in the war against terror, a responsibility to speak clearly about the threats that we all face, a responsibility to promote freedom, to free people from the clutches of barbaric people such as Saddam Hussein who tortured, mutilated — there were mass graves that we have found— a responsibility to fight AIDS, the pandemic of AIDS, and to feed the hungry. We have a responsibility. To me that is history's call to America. I accept the call and will continue to lead in that direction”
Regarding opening his military records:
Russert: “But you authorize the release of everything to settle this?”
President Bush: “Yes, absolutely. We did so in 2000, by the way”
On the Economy & the Budget:
“The stock market started to decline in March of 2000. That was the first sign that things were troubled. The recession started upon my arrival. It could have been some say February, some say March, some speculate maybe earlier it started, but nevertheless it happened as we showed up here. The attacks on our country affected our economy. Corporate scandals affected the confidence of people and therefore affected the economy. My decision on Iraq, this kind of march to war, affected the economy, but we have been through a lot. And what those numbers show is the fact we have been through a lot. But what the people must understand is that instead of wondering what to do, I acted, and I acted by cutting the taxes on individuals and small businesses, primarily. And that, itself, has led to this recovery. So, you show that the numbers kind of — I'm not suggesting the chart only shows the bad numbers, but how about the fact that we are now increasing jobs or the fact that unemployment is now down to 5.6 percent? There was a winter recession and unemployment went up, and now it's heading in the right direction. The economic stimulus plan that I passed, or I asked the Congress to pass, and I worked with Congress to pass, is making a big difference”
“If you look at the appropriations bills that were passed under my watch, in the last year of President Clinton, discretionary spending was up 15 percent, and ours have steadily declined”
Closing Comment
“Who can properly use American power in a way to make the world a better place, and who understands that the true strength of this country is the hearts and souls of the American citizens, who understands times are changing and how best to have policy reflect those times. And I look forward to a good campaign. I know exactly where I want to lead the country. I’ve shown the American people I can lead. I’ve shown the American people I can sit here in the Oval Office when times are tough and be steady and make good decisions, and I look forward to articulating what I want to do the next four years if I'm fortunate enough to be their president”
|
bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 4606
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 9:12 am: | |
I think even the State of the Union address is a tradition. I think he can report in writing if he wants to.
Unfortunately, the great unwashed want to hear their President and see him on TV. As Cjc said, he doesn't have to do this, but not to do it is dangerous, although in Bush's case maybe not as dangerous as doing it.
It will be interesting to see if he agrees to debate the eventual Democratic nominee. I would think it would be very hard to avoid this, but who knows? |
ashear
Citizen
Username: Ashear
Post Number: 951
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 10:17 am: | |
The times today reminds us how laughable the idea that the tax cuts were intended to stimulate the economy is. Bush proposed the tax cuts in the campaign when the economy was roaring then stuck to them, virtually unchanged, except when the dems forced some modest immediate relief which was the only acutually stimulative tax cut in the package.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/10/opinion/10TUE1.html |
tjohn
Citizen
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 2224
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 10:35 am: | |
Cjc,
The public may not have a Constitutional right to press conferences, but if Bush understood leadership, he would be conducting press conferences. Real Americans have never respected generals that hide like rats in their cushy dugouts. |
drewdix
Citizen
Username: Drewdix
Post Number: 477
Registered: 7-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 10:41 am: | |
Tjohn ya beat me to it. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 872
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 10:57 am: | |
Sure, the NY Times decries that tax cut. Only the rich got a tax cut which drove up the deficit, but the rich don't get to really have their tax cut until 2005, meaning the tax cuts they didn't get caused the deficit because no one else got a tax cut.
Tjohn -- don't worry. All the real Americans who count will be able to hear and see Bush in the days ahead. You won't necessarily see him conducting a town hall in lost-cause New Jersey, but you will in Real American states elsewhere in the country.
He's leading on the big things just fine. It's the little things that drive me nuts. Time Poll out today has him beating Kerry 50-48.
Funny thing -- this was released on Saturday, but hack news organizations like ABC just focus on a Newsweek poll from last week. ABC should hold a press conference. They're leading us in the wrong direction.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Saturday, February 7, 2004, 8PM EST
TIME/CNN POLL:
IF ELECTION WERE HELD TODAY,
50% OF AMERICANS SURVEYED WOULD VOTE FOR PRESIDENT BUSH, 48% WOULD VOTE FOR
SENATOR JOHN KERRY
--
Against Senator John Edwards, Bush Leads 52% to 46%,
Against Retired General Wesley Clark, Bush Leads 55% to 41% |
Duncan
Citizen
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 1513
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 11:53 am: | |
Uh though one percentage point aint much these are the numbers as published on CNN's site.
When likely voters were asked whether they preferred Bush or Kerry, 49 percent answered the president and 48 percent chose Kerry.
not to mention you ignore the margin of error.
Answers to poll questions among likely voters had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.
The incumbant is in trouble.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take"
Wayne Gretzky |
tjohn
Citizen
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 2227
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 12:03 pm: | |
I don't know if Bush is in trouble, but it sure is nice to see the Democratic field being taken so seriously after having been written off just one month ago.
I suspect that the current administration will display a really mean streak under pressure. |
drewdix
Citizen
Username: Drewdix
Post Number: 478
Registered: 7-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 12:08 pm: | |
I'd like to hope so.
But we need to see after the counter attack when the Dem nomination is settled. It's natural that Bush numbers and opinion are going to sag with all the attention on the Dem. primaries; the real (or more real) numbers will be evident when the dust settles and Rove & Co. organize their offensive. Bush will bounce back- how much will be interresting.
WHo knows what skeletons Kerry may have. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 875
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 12:14 pm: | |
I ignore nothing, Duncan. I merely point out the fair and balanced reporting of ABC. I don't dispute that as of today, the election could go either way.
Furthermore, I believe that even that Bush's slight lead within the margin of error will not be in campaign coverage tonight on The Big Three. It doesn't fit the storyline. |
bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 4609
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 12:26 pm: | |
Interesting that over the weekend Fox News was shouting from the roof about this poll or another one that showed Bush in the lead. The margin of error was never mentioned to my recollection. Other polls that show different results weren't mentioned either. But then this is the fair and balanced news, so I guess they are irrelevant.
Either way, it ain't right imho.
Drew, even if Kerry doesn't have any skeletons Rove will manufacture them ala the attacks on John McCain in SC four years ago. I also suspect that Bin Laden will be "killed" the week before the election, but DNA test will not be available to the Wednesday after the election. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 1940
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 12:40 pm: | |
The highest adjusted marginal rate is now 36%, and it was 39.6% before the bush cuts. So yes, the wealthy have had a sizeable cut already. On that last million bucks Dennis Koslowsky made he saved nearly $40,000, which would pay after-tax benefits for four families on unemployment for a full year.
But hey, he needed that new toilet seat! |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 881
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 2:02 pm: | |
Fox and CNN on their best night of nights get 2M people. So basically, no one sees them. That's why I spoke about the Big 3. |
Cowboy
Citizen
Username: Cowboy
Post Number: 327
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 2:36 pm: | |
tjohn says, "The public may not have a Constitutional right to press conferences, but if Bush understood leadership, he would be conducting press conferences."
It should be obvoius to even the least informed voter among us that Bush is a poor communicator under such formats. This is especially true when compared with Reagan or Clinton.
Why then should Bush be expected to utilize a format that makes him uncomfortable and seem weak? Because you wish to see him fail?
As Sylad so graciously put it, "Like or dislike him, you have to give him credit for standing by his decision and taking accountability."
Bush might not be as adept as those other guys at side-stepping and avoiding responsibility, so let him communicate in forums that better suit his style. |
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 2073
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 2:42 pm: | |
I think the fact that he's a weak communicator shows how poorly he grasps essential concepts and how his views are simpleminded. We deserve a president who sees the complexities of life. This is why we deserve someone who can communicate better.
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
There is nothing
|
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 882
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 2:57 pm: | |
Steven Hawking gives poor press conferences too.
Come on, Tom! Just because someone isn't a smooth communicator means they're simpleminded? Leonardo DiCaprio (or whatever his name is) is smooth, and he's clueless!
And you don't deserve anything outside of what's guaranteed in the Constitution. You have to work for the rest. |
ffof
Citizen
Username: Ffof
Post Number: 1917
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 3:03 pm: | |
It scares me to think that Bush might communicate with heads of state the way he communicates in a press conference. |
Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 2075
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 3:06 pm: | |
I don't mean all bad communicators are simpleminded. I mean this one is, in my view. I realize I can't convince anyone of this, and that's OK. It's only my view.
As for deserving, I guess my point is that if you ask for (or demand) something, you might or might not get it. If you don't ask for it, you surely won't.
Tom Reingold the prissy-pants
There is nothing
|
tjohn
Citizen
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 2232
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 3:10 pm: | |
Good communications skills are a critical skill for the President. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 885
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 3:36 pm: | |
From the UK's Guardian today. Add this to the "yeah....well the owners of the media are all conservative..."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Media chiefs back Kerry campaign
Owen Gibson
Tuesday February 10, 2004
Kerry: media chiefs have pledged to raise between $50,000 and $100,000
Fresh from his latest win in Maine, the favourite to challenge George Bush for the US presidency has secured the financial support of some of the most powerful media moguls in the world.
As John Kerry's campaign to secure the Democrat nomination - and with it a crack at the White House - continues to gather pace, it has emerged that it is being bankrolled by key executives from News Corporation, MTV-owner Viacom and Sony.
The victory in Maine, Mr Kerry's 10th out of the 12 primaries in the opening weeks of the Democrat selection campaign, confirmed his position as overwhelming favourite to take on President Bush in November's presidential election.
Unsurprisingly, the donation from News Corp's boardroom came not from chairman Rupert Murdoch, a committed Republican, but from the company's chief operating officer, Peter Chernin.
Mr Chernin, one of Mr Murdoch's most trusted lieutenants, is among several media chiefs who have pledged to raise between $50,000 and $100,000 to support the Vietnam war veteran's
campaign for the White House.
Others who have pledged to raise more than $50,000 include the Viacom chief executive, Sumner Redstone, and Sony chairman Howard Stringer, whose name has recently been linked with the vacant chairmanships at ITV and the BBC.
Most of the money raised from these contributors will have to be raised through business associates, relatives and friends as individuals can only give a total of $4,000 each to presidential candidates - $2,000 during the primaries and another $2,000 during a general election. |
ashear
Citizen
Username: Ashear
Post Number: 953
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 4:06 pm: | |
CJC - should I feel better abou the fact that the deficit will get even bigger when the additional tax cuts for the richest Americans kick in? |
Ukealalio
Citizen
Username: Ukealalio
Post Number: 437
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 6:36 pm: | |
Comparing George Bush to Steven Hawkings is like comparing Albert Einstein to Tommy Lee. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 1944
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 7:34 pm: | |
I don't recall anyone coming away with the impression that Stephen Hawking doesn't know what he's talking about.
Am I supposed to be shocked that a political candidate is raising money? Bush has $9figures in his war chest and he's running unopposed. Did the tooth fairy bring it? |
anon
Citizen
Username: Anon
Post Number: 960
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 8:45 pm: | |
"You won't necessarily see him conducting a town hall in lost-cause New Jersey, but you will in Real American states elsewhere in the country."
New Jersey is not a Real American state? What is it? Why do you live here?
|
Diversity Man
Citizen
Username: Deadwhitemale
Post Number: 626
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 9:07 pm: | |
Reads like an annex of the Upper West Side.
DWM |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 1948
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 10:13 pm: | |
One of the original 13 states, and unlike many of the states that Bush has a lock on, has always been. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 893
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 1:27 pm: | |
ashear -- blame tax cuts for the rich when we get them. If you blame us before we get them, you'll look bad. It will look like you don't think people in the bottom tax brackets don't deserve a break, including those who don't pay a dime in income taxes.
anon -- New Jersey is a mess -- taxes, govt bloat, Newark, Camden, The Torch, equally corrupt policians in both parties, pitiful electorate that relects the same people who give them the problems they continually complain about, etc. There are jokes about New Jersey for a reason. Why do I live here? My job is here. And a good thing too. Someone here has to pay for everyone else.
tom...the point of discussion was the presentation aspects of Bush without regard to substance. As I said, he got his substance right, it was his presentation that was horrible. |
ML1
Citizen
Username: Ml1
Post Number: 1556
Registered: 5-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 1:31 pm: | |
who cares if people in other states joke about us?
|
drewdix
Citizen
Username: Drewdix
Post Number: 480
Registered: 7-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 2:15 pm: | |
cjc,
I don't understand your double negative.
The bill passed in 2003 hand the top 1% income group 36% of the tax cuts for the next 4 years-- starting in 2003.
So to me that means "you've" indeed got them now. But again, what am I missing?
You live and work in this area?
Heck, PA and NY are viable options for living if NJ has no hope.
But I admit to sharing your frustration with the Garden State.
|
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 896
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 3:40 pm: | |
Right, but we haven't sucked up near what we're going to get until -- in some cases -- starting this year's tax return. This, I think, is why the lib tank Citizens for Tax Justice fears them being increasingly tilted to the actual taxpayers (or 'the rich') as the years move toward 2010.
Here's something from an accountant website which is similar with what my accountant has told me with the 2003 tax cut bill.
http://www.tradersaccounting.com/taxact2003.asp
People have been railing about the deficit the rich have caused before 2003, before we really started getting the biggest chunks of relief.
I live in Maplewood, and technically work in NYC when I do go into town. I'd move into some place less taxing, but the wife won't. "We can afford it!" Sure...sure...
|
ashear
Citizen
Username: Ashear
Post Number: 955
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 8:38 am: | |
CJC - my point exactly. The tax cuts the rich already got, made the deficit worse, the ones to come will make it worse still. The modest cuts to middle income folks are barely a blip on the budget radar. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page