POLITICALLY, 9-11 Was The Best Thing To Happen To Bush

Probably, but another that is almost as important IMHO is the fact that the Dem Leadership thought he would fall under his own weight and didn't really challenge him through 9/10. From the day of the SC decision, they should have been doing everything possible to drive Bush's numbers into the 40's. After 9/11, they continued to let him get away with appropriating the symbols without earning it. Thankfully, we now have two parties again.

 

uh.... 9-11 was the biggest terror attack ever to occur on US soil. Thousands of innocents lost their lives. Don't you think it *should* change something?! Why do the liberals want to go on living the way we were before? It exposed us to danger, and we paid the price. History is a teacher. If you don't learn from your mistakes and change your ways, you become extinct.

I think the biggest thing that burns the liberals up over the 9-11 issue isn't the lives that were lost. It's the political clout that was lost. This is very sad and regrettable. The liberals throw their sarcasm around daily with their mockery of the tragic event. They say "9-11 changed everthing " and DISGRACE the people who died on that day. How many people who lost loves ones on that day would say such an inconsiderate and thoughtless thing? But to the liberals, it means nothing. When people who the event means something to speak up, the liberals shout them down for being partisan. It's gross.

Keep it up liberals, it has thus far decapitated your party -- and rightfully so.

 

9-11 was absolutely the best thing politically that has ever happened to George W. Bush.

It gave him the one thing he never had prior to 9-11: Credibility

 

Cue the sarcastic "9-11 changed everything" posts...

 

Excerpt from today's press conference... are we to believe that after the last three years of the Congress rolling over for Bush that now, all of a sudden, the White House can't exert enough authority to compel an additional two months? Either the WH doesn't want the extension and is trying to finesse the deal or Bush has lost all pull with the GOP congressional leaders. Hmmmm. I wonder which one it is?
__________________________

QUESTION: First, where the idea of a precedent is concerned, President -- sitting President Gerald Ford went up to Capitol Hill and actually testified before the House Judiciary Committee, so there is a greater precedent than what you're referring to.

My question is, in every speech he gives, President Bush invokes --

McCLELLAN: Keep in mind there are separation of powers issues involved when you're talking about a legislatively created body.

QUESTION: I'm sure President Ford was aware of those. In every speech he gives, President Bush invokes the atrocities of 9/11 and he talks about how that event has impressed on him a determination to always honor the victims of those atrocities in his daily conduct of his office. And I wonder if you could explain with some serious Texan straight talk here, Scott, how it is honoring the victims of 9/11 to restrict the questioning of the President on this subject to one hour?

McCLELLAN: I hope you'll talk about the unprecedented cooperation that we're providing to the commission when you report this, James. Because if you look back at what we've done, it is unprecedented. We have provided more than 2 million pages of documents. We provided more than 60 compact discs of radar, flight and other information; more than 800 audio cassette tapes of interviews and other materials; more than 100 briefings, including at the head-of-agency level; more than 560 interviews. So this administration is cooperating closely and in an unprecedented way with the 9/11 Commission, because their work is very important.

QUESTION: That would have been a very pertinent answer had I asked you about the administration. But, in fact, I asked you about the President’s cooperation.

McCLELLAN: And the President is pleased to sit down with the chairman and vice chairman to provide them with the information they need to do their job. And we believe …

QUESTION: Why only one hour? Why only one hour?

McCLELLAN: -- we believe that he can provide them the necessary information in this private meeting.

QUESTION: In 60 minutes, that’s all it will take?

McCLELLAN: Well, the 9/11 Commission -- look back to what the chairman said earlier this morning. He talked about cooperation and the extraordinary commitment of the President to sit down with the commission.

QUESTION: Can you define legislative body? Why is this --

McCLELLAN: Legislatively created. Congress created the 9/11 Commission.

QUESTION: Scott, did the President ask Hastert, during his meetings this week, to extend the deadline?

McCLELLAN: I’m sorry? We’ve made our views known to Speaker Hastert, yes.

QUESTION: The President, personally, asked him?

McCLELLAN: And they did discuss it, as well. And Chief of Staff Card also spoke to him about our support for an extension.

QUESTION: What’s the response that you’ve been getting?

McCLELLAN: Well, we continue to urge Congress to extend it for two months.

QUESTION: So you’ve got a nowhere so far?

McCLELLAN: Well, you’ve heard Speaker Hastert's comments. You’ve heard other leaders comment on it, as well. And we continue to urge Congress to grant an extension.

QUESTION: The President -- we know Andy Card called Hastert, but the President, himself, as well?

McCLELLAN: They spoke about it earlier this week, as well. The Speaker was here a couple of times this week.

 

Not so fast there Mr. President, er, Speaker Hastert...

I love the quote at the end that the "highway program" is being held hostage. It's pretty much the same thing as 9/11.
_________________
Highway Bill Embroiled in 9 / 11 Dispute
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 11:58 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Nearly 5,000 Transportation Department workers face a furlough on Monday, a possible result of two senators using an expiring highway bill to force House Republicans to accept a two month extension of an independent investigation of the Sept. 11 terror attacks.

``We all have a choice here to make,'' said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who along with Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., was using the highway bill as leverage to win an extension for the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, which is scheduled to finish its work on May 27.

He said the choice was between ``minor'' disruptions in highway projects and ``telling the families of those who died on 9/11 that the commission will not be able to complete its work.''

President Bush has agreed to extend the commission's work until July 27, but efforts to legislate that action have met resistance among House Republican leaders, including Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill.

``There are people that have great concerns about extending the 9/11 commission on our side of the rotunda,'' House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, said Thursday. One of those concerns is that the findings of the commission, which is studying the nation's preparedness before the attacks and its response, may come too close to the presidential election.

Former Gov. Thomas H. Kean of New Jersey, the commission's chairman, said getting an extension was urgent. Without it, he said, ``means certain research we're planning to do won't get done, and certain trails we won't be able to follow. Some of our conclusions won't be as informed.''

Lieberman said the commission had not been able to complete its work because of foot dragging by the administration and stalled highway programs would ``pale in significance to not giving the commission the extra time it needs.''

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., who supports extending the commission's life, on Friday sought to meet the demands of the two senators by quickly bringing up for a voice vote a bill, approved by the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday, that authorizes the two-month extension. But McCain and Lieberman wanted that extension on a bill that the House could not ignore.

The existing highway and public transit spending law expires on Sunday, and without a temporary extension the Transportation Department may have to furlough about 5,000 workers, spokesman Robert Johnson said.

``If the Senate doesn't pass an extension by Sunday night, then today would be their last day on the job,'' he said.

Johnson said affected departments are the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

``There wouldn't be anyone working with states on their federal highway projects, there wouldn't be anyone to assist with truck inspections along the borders, there wouldn't be anyone to handle consumer complaints about household goods movers, there wouldn't be anyone at NHTSA to deal with their various safety programs,'' he said.

The House and Senate are now trying to work out differences on a major new highway bill that would outline spending over the next six years. The Senate recently approved a $318 billion bill, which the White House has threatened to veto, saying it shouldn't go above the president's $256 billion proposal.

The House has yet to take up its bill, but is expected to press for at least the amount passed by the Senate.

House Transportation Committee Chairman Don Young, R-Alaska, late Thursday won House approval of a two-month extension of the highway program to keep projects going while the negotiations continue on the new bill.

McCain and Lieberman are blocking the Senate version of the two-month highway bill extension.

Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., a senior member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, criticized the two senators, saying they were ``seeking to hold hostage the whole highway program in the United States.'' He said their action would shut down contract authority and payments for work already contracted by the states.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan on Friday said Bush, who has agreed to meet privately with the commission, agreed to its extension. He said assertions that Hastert was doing the White House bidding in opposing the extension was a ``silly idea.''

 

The liberals act like 9-11 *by itself* propelled Bush's popularity. This could not be farther from the truth. It was Bush's LEADERSHIP during these very difficult times that the country respected. Had he not demonstrated the incredible leadership after 9-11, the public's reaction would have been much different.

The liberals never want to give him credit for his leadership abilities. Once again, they choose to focus on all things negative.

 

If Bush is the leader of the free-world, the leader of the United States, and the leader of the Republican party, he must not be a very good leader if he can't a congressman and member of his own party to extend the deadline.

That shows a true lack of leadership ability.

 

If you took a poll of Bush's leadership abilities in the wake of 9-11, Franchise Blade, you would be in the *severe* minority on the issue. Sorry.

 

I gave him a little credit. He delivered his best speech soon after 9/11. I supported the Afghan War. He had his one memorable sound bite on the pile. And he got a lot of mileage out of all three of those.

However, subsequent events have shown that he doesn't have the will to support first responders, finish the job in Afghanistan, or make more than one good speech.

A lot of the credit for his "leadership" also has to go to the Dems for laying low after 9/11. If the shoe had been on the other foot, Repubs would have used 9/11 to further divide the country.

 

I'm not interested in polls. Polls tell people's opinion. I'm interested in facts.

The facts(supposedly) are that Bush, who is the leader of the free world, President, and leader of the Republican party, asked another Republican who is a congressman for an extension. That congressman refused his leader.

That shows a poor ability to lead.

But if you were to ask an anonymous poll this...

If someone were the leader of the free world, President of the U.S., and leader of his political party, but couldn't get a congressman to accept a 2 month extension on an investigation about one of the nation's worst tragedies... Would you consider that person a good leader?

I bet that poll would be overwhelmingly negative. If you ask about facts in a poll, you'll get answers based on those facts. If you ask about George W. Bush being a good leader, you'll get answers regarding the person.

 

I see it as a mixed bag.

1. Dems on average have always "misunderestimated" Bush, and many continue to do so.

2. Many people from a diverse range of political leanings were suprised by Bush after the tragedy. He went from bumbling to kind of steady looking, and that was not all an optical illusion. Hey, I don't get it, but people respond to W on a personal level. Even I will admit I would probably enjoy having a beer with him (particularly if he got the tab).

3. If 9/11 has been underplayed by components of the left wing, I would have to argue it has been abused just as much, if not more, by those in power. All sorts of legislation was pushed through in the aftermath that had *nothing* to do with terrorism. The worst abuse of 9/11 happened in foreign policy. A lot of genuine good will was chucked, and we instead emphasized the cliche notion that we are incredibly arrogant and arbitrary, instead of benevolent and righteous.

Overall, I'm not sure I agree, MacB, and I'm serious. Bush was clumsy, and the election had a bad aftertaste, but who knows what this presidency would have been without 9/11? No Iraq war, a different deficit picture? Maybe he could have been more of a "uniterer," made fewer difficult, divisive decisions, and avoided falling into the arms of Wolfie, et al. So I actually don't think it's obvious whether 9/11 has been good or bad for Bush. It helped people see him as a leader, as having conviction, but it also helped him become more extreme in his policies.

 

If the President had bothered to do something about the memos he was getting during the summer of 2001, there might have never been a 9-11. But hey, I'm just another liberal kook, right? But we had to have 9-11, just like we needed Pearl Harbor. Americans don't want to go to war until you convince them their way of life is being attacked.

I don't think Osama will be caught (if he is caught, it'll be in the summer, closer to election time...ahem). If he is caught, then you can bet his testimony will never reach anyone. He has tales to tell.

George Bush should thank Osama bin Laden every day. There is no other way that the neo-cons could have advanced their agenda without 9-11. Hell, they even say in "Rebuilding America's Defenses," written 10 years ago, that we need to kick ass and take no prisoners in such countries as Iran, Iraq, North Korea, and Syria, but the rest of the world might not follow our path "barring a major event such as a modern-day Pearl Harbor."

Richard Perle (a.k.a., Satan´s Penis) recently wrote a book about the righteous war against the Muslims. He mentions, in effect, that civilian casualties on our side are negligible in the greater cause of this war we must fight.

Perle is the same guy they took Bush to see during his 2000 run. Perle said that it was obvious Bush didn't know much but was willing to learn.

In other words, Bush was the empty vessel that Perle could fill with his "knowledge."

Given the allegations made recently by the former Secretary of the Treasury (not to mention an article in Time written well before Iraq II) that we were planning to attack Iraq from the early days of Bush's administration....

This is a war that this administration badly wanted. I would have only strongly disliked Bush until it became clear that 9-11 had to happen for him to have his holy war and start taking his marching orders from God.

Sure, there are no conspiracies in American life. Except that FDR cut off all oil to Japan as a pretext to starve them out or, as he knew, to get them to attack us.

82% of the American public was against war the day before Pearl Harbor. The day of the attack, almost every American was howling in support of war.

"All war is based on deception." I think it was Sun Tzu who said that.

 

(to MacB)

Okay, I'll bow out, because I'm losing this in semantics.

Apart from the specifics of this presidency, you're saying that "the rope" is what is measured to be politically good, even if the rope is used to hang oneself. If you ask me, you're not saying "the best thing" to happen to the guy politically. You're saying "the most empowering thing." Two very different points to me.

 

Right.