Well, you've really shown me the light with that statement. You managed to throw a grammar mistake(s?), two spelling mistakes, and namecalling all into 8 words. Color me impressed. Anyway, it's apparent there's no point in arguing anymore. I'll just accept you're part of the 10% who disapprove of his job and move on and you can accept that even people who don't like him are at least giving him moderate approval.
ZRB -- Al Gore in office right now scares the hell out of me. By the way...if we go to the war, drilling in Alaska will be imminent. We have to get oil from somewhere. I say we get it and, in the meantime, work to develop technology that allows us to be far less dependent on the Middle East to power our economy (and our war effort, for that matter.) We'll worry about seals later. I'm a bit more concerned with the safety of my countrymen right about now.
Ah, a sign of cyber-defeat, bringing spelling into the game. Francis...I'm sorry I mispelled "Milli Vanilli". You aparently are more aquainted with thier work than I am. This is the net silleeeassses, dontgimmethatgrammarcrap! WE're at warr!!!
Why? It's been shown many times on this board (OK, a couple by rimbaud) that he has a very intelligent military mind. Are you scared that he might not bomb first and ask questions later.
I get the feeling that some of the posters to this thread wish they were Monica Lewinsky. It's a shame that in this time of trouble, people can't shut their yaps, and use that energy for positive not negative. Anyway, have a cigar.
The attack on your spelling went along with the grammar and namecalling to show the absurdity of the use of the statement "Most people got Milie Vanili a grammy dumbo" to somehow debunk approval ratings. I doubt the views of the NARAS on music are analogous to our view of how our president is handling his job. Oh and for the record you misspelled apparently,acquainted, and misspelled.
I find it hilarious that someone would call the country dumb for electing Bush, when much of the reason he won was because the opponent's constituents couldn't read a ballot.
This is such a bunch of horse$hit......... The Rockets don't play in the East, and Gore ain't in office. We have what we have, nitpick if you want, but in my opinion he has done exactly what he is supposed to do, and more importantly, what he has been advised to do. Gore would be saying the same PC statements, and he would also be advised, as all president's are, if he was in office. I for one am glad Bush is taking the reigns and taking action to save lives from terrorism. Sorry, but I am just a little agonized that in light of what has occured, we still have a tired, old Bush vs. Gore debate. If the congress can support Bush in this trying time, then we citizens certainly can.
If you had asked me 2 weeks ago who would I rather have during a crisis like this, I would have said Clinton (or Gore) in a heartbeat. But having heard from the Middle East perspective lately, it looks like that Clinton's bombing of the Sudan and Afghanistan after the Embassy bombings actually exacerbated the hatred of the U.S. in the Arab world, who see Bin Ladin as their savior. But now I actually like Bush in this situation, not for his charisma or experience (which he has very little of) but because of his experienced advisors (esp. Colin Powell) who I believe will be able to guide him on the right track. And I think it's pretty clear at this point that he won't be "bombing first and asking questions later." It sounds like this "war" will be on many, many fronts, and will probably include domestic aspect (stopping terrorist cells in America), diplomacy (uniting other nations, thus defusing the "us against them" mentality) covert operations (intelligence, US rangers) as well as traditional military might (ground forces). So far, I'm very impressed by the lengths that the administration is going through (Bush included) to make sure we have all our bases covered.
In my mind GWB has never done a single remarkable thing in his life, nor ever showed great leadership in a single political, business, or a personal arena to my knowledge. He would not be the among the first guys I want to handle this situation, but the fact is he is in center of this situation nonetheless. This is his first great call where his mettle and leadership is needed to better our nation, and I hope he is up to the task and delivers with great thoughtfulness and resolve. I don't like him much up to now (so far I think he is doing well post-disaster though), but I am rooting for him and hope I will be able to say in time he did some great things for our country--because we need some great leadership.
I feel (more so than think) that a response is warranted to the inane posts made by fromobile so far. As a lurker since 1997, and on through the previous weeks, I've seen my share of stupid, divisive, and one-tracked posts. Fromobile, I'm not saying that your opinions are wrong or that they are any of those things mentioned above, but they do, in my own view, border on ranting. That said, what is the cause of your bitterness towards the current administration? This is not addressed towards anyone in particular... but to like-minded people. And the question should be at this moment, what does America need in a leader right now? I know I'm repeating comments made by other members of the board, but I'm not sure that you grasp the essential nature of the predicament we're in. I think we need a leader--someone to unite the country, to identify our goal/our purpose, and someone to rally our resources so that our economic, political, and societal way of life can be preserved. If you don't agree with the values that we hold dear, Judeo-Christian tinted they may be, then by all means protest through your representative, and if that fails, then it's a free country... I'm sure there are inumberable locations that you can move to. It would be awesome [!] to have a Churchill or Roosevelt in the White house right now.. for the country can be lifted with "blood, sweat, and tears" and "a day which will live in infamy" rhetoric. But as I can tell, there isn't quite anyone like the two in the world right now... well, the one with the rhetoric is hiding out in a cave somewhere right now, isn't he? No, what we have is a "they will hear us soon," speech. And if you're not moved by that, then I wanted to ask you if you have been watching any sort of news coverage for the past week. What we also have is a man determined to do his job, and right now, it's a pretty simple task to identify the things that he needs to do in order to lead (see above). He is not the smartest, most eloquent, or experienced person, granted. But he is honest, sees the black and white, and at times, emotional. He is also surrounded by the most capable crew in a national crisis. To me, those qualities is what this situation needs. I don't think the country needs or want a long drawn out explanation of how the world is where it is now. If you want a lesson on the effects of US hegemony, the rise of NGOs (non-governmental organizations) and neo-medievalism or embedded liberalism or whatever through globalization, then by all means take a damm class. When the country has just been through terror, we do not need a president to sit down and lecture on US policies of containment in the Middle East, Cold-War espionage, and our Machiavellian actions versus our desire to stay true to high-minded principles of democracy--in the past centuries. And most of all, we do not need to be pointing critical, "I shouldn't be running this country, the fact that you elected me is a joke." speeches. To what ends do you want with these words? Will it help in any sort of way with the predicament? Will it help families bring back their loved ones? Employers back their employees? Sons their fathers? One last thought, as I don't want to reply numerous times to different threads--- nd I read this somewhere.. to the people who say that America's policies are in part the blame for her attacks, that our policies of antagonizing the world has brought this tragedy upon ourselves... I find that ridiculous. It's like blaming the rape victim for what she went through. And we do not need that right now. Godspeed. And go Rox.
My sentiments exactly, DesertScar. If our President's last name wasn't BUSH, there's no way in hell he'd ever be in the White House or even Governor's Mansion for that matter. He is however, our president, and I am rooting for him. The attention and spotlight of the world is on George W. Bush, and it is his time to deliver and make the right decisions. As liberal as I am, this is no time for a Bush-Gore debate. Gore blew it and it's his fault that he lost. Now is GWB's time. I for one am rallying for OUR president, and encourage all my fellow Democrats to do the same..... Oh ya, one more thing: DASCHLE in 04!
