NationStates Jolt Archive

Now, I wouldn't expect George Bush to have any more class now than he's proven to lack in the past. A sitting President attacking the Democrats as "the angry left" is just beyond even what I expect from him. Do you see this as a classless action of a sitting President, or is he right in attacking during the convention?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/02/bush.speech/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

I see it has typical Bush.


And I will treat it as such. By ignoring it.

I wonder what they might be angry about

Now, I wouldn't expect George Bush to have any more class now than he's proven to lack in the past. A sitting President attacking the Democrats as "the angry left" is just beyond even what I expect from him. Do you see this as a classless action of a sitting President, or is he right in attacking during the convention?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/02/bush.speech/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

He used the phrase "the angry left." He didn't call the Democrats "the angry left."

As an aside, when this man passes away, Im drinking a bottle of fine wine and shooting off fireworks.

He used the phrase "the angry left." He didn't call the Democrats "the angry left."

Right, if we play semantics that would be valid. Who do you think he was talking about? Do you think his intent was to rile partisan politics or just make a case for his candidate? Do you think his comments do anything to make the country better? My belief is that we know full well he was talking about the Democrats. I think to ignore that is probably wishful thinking or just giving too much credit to Bush.

He's not running for reelection...he could pretty much do whatever the hell he wants as long as it's not illegal. If it works, go for it.

Right, if we play semantics that would be valid. Who do you think he was talking about? Do you think his intent was to rile partisan politics or just make a case for his candidate? Do you think his comments do anything to make the country better? My belief is that we know full well he was talking about the Democrats. I think to ignore that is probably wishful thinking or just giving too much credit to Bush.

Ah, yes! How dare we "play semantics" in discussing a speech. :tongue: Beautiful. But, sure, if you want to think he meant Democrats generally, you can believe that. Just don't let semantics get in the way. ;)

He's not running for reelection...he could pretty much do whatever the hell he wants as long as it's not illegal. If it works, go for it.

Right, he could do whatever he wants. There's a big difference between could and should. I could go to my neighbor and spit on their lawn, but I should. I could tell my Mom she was a horrid example of parenthood. But, with her dying of cancer right now should I? I could tell my wife, "yeah, you really do look fat in that outfit." Should I? Hence end should and could.

Ah, yes! How dare we "play semantics" in discussing a speech. :tongue: Beautiful. But, sure, if you want to think he meant Democrats generally, you can believe that. Just don't let semantics get in the way. ;)

Who do you believe he meant then? I'll leave my mind open to who he might be talking about. Please expound.

He's not running for reelection...he could pretty much do whatever the hell he wants as long as it's not illegal. If it works, go for it.

Its cute that you think legality would stop Der Führer from doing what he wants.

Its cute that you think legality would stop Der Führer from doing what he wants.

Good point.

He's done this before. Dammit, I can't remember when, but he made a speech a few years ago in which he did the same thing. He's an ass and he can suck it. Now he and I (angry and to the left of Bush) are even, and we can all go back to enjoying the fact that the world doesn't really care about him anymore because we're all more interested in his replacement. :)

Now, I wouldn't expect George Bush to have any more class now than he's proven to lack in the past. A sitting President attacking the Democrats as "the angry left" is just beyond even what I expect from him. Do you see this as a classless action of a sitting President, or is he right in attacking during the convention?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/02/bush.speech/index.html#cnnSTCVideo
thats the reaction we had. i was expecting that he had the strength to stand up to russian aggression or iranian defiance or something but NOOOOOO he can stand up to angry liberals

on the other hand i thought that fred thompson gave an excellent speech. i wonder if he wrote any of it.

He's not running for reelection...he could pretty much do whatever the hell he wants as long as it's not illegal. If it works, go for it.
McCain and the rest of the Republican party would probably prefer he shut up and lock himself in a basement somewhere, though.

I could tell my wife, "yeah, you really do look fat in that outfit." Should I? Hence end should and could.
Does it? Honesty is the best policy, you know, especially when married to a fatty.
See, I could say something like that, and I did, because that's the sort of person I am. Bush is like that too.

I'm sorry all I heard was "quack" hobble "quack" hobble "quack" hobble.....

McCain and the rest of the Republican party would probably prefer he shut up and lock himself in a basement somewhere, though.

I seriously think that's why Bush wasn't there in person, let alone Cheney.

I'm sorry all I heard was "quack" hobble "quack" hobble "quack" hobble.....

Shrub better hope Dick doesn't miss hunting or else...

McCain and the rest of the Republican party would probably prefer he shut up and lock himself in a basement somewhere, though.


Does it? Honesty is the best policy, you know, especially when married to a fatty.
See, I could say something like that, and I did, because that's the sort of person I am. Bush is like that too.

I think what you said was terribly funny. Why? Because my wife is 5'4'' and 125 lbs and a former pageant girl. I try to be empathetic when she tells me about how fat she's become. I know it means enough to her for her to be self-conscious about it. I just tell her she's beautiful because 5 lbs is just 5 lbs.

Who do you believe he meant then? I'll leave my mind open to who he might be talking about. Please expound.

Who he meant differs depending on the listener's orientation. We all have our opinions of who the radicals are within the opposition party.

Bush says McCain won't be swayed by the "angry left" in his decisionmaking; the line's context suggests he's referring to opponents of McCain's foreign policy, but the meaning is up to the listener, again. The line is deliberately vague, but is clearly not categorical in reference to the Democratic party.

I seriously think that's why Bush wasn't there in person, let alone Cheney.

Not to mention, I still think its a horrible idea for them to mention anything about Hurricanes. I don't think people have forgotten about the woefully inadequate response to Katrina.

I can say whatever the hell I want too. I'm a goddamned polymath genius playwright and statesman, the father of modern armored warfare, and friend of all nations and peoples.

Top that.

Who he meant differs depending on the listener's orientation. We all have our opinions of who the radicals are within the opposition party.

Bush says McCain won't be swayed by the "angry left" in his decisionmaking; the line's context suggests he's referring to opponents of McCain's foreign policy, but the meaning is up to the listener, again. The line is deliberately vague, but is clearly not categorical in reference to the Democratic party.

I accept your logic in terms of subjectivity of the listener. But I believe that we must look at the past behavior of the speaker to be our guide. By looking at the comment in a vacuum as some guy who just said some stuff it it easy to believe he just meant radicals. Using your knowledge of the type of rhetoric George Bush has been known to use makes me believe he knew exactly who he was talking about. He was talking about his "enemies." You're either with him or against him right (bang, bang-bangbang) *cool shooting irons and downs some whiskey*

I can say whatever the hell I want too. I'm a goddamned polymath genius playwright and statesman, the father of modern armored warfare, and friend of all nations and peoples.

Top that.

You're going off the rails on a crazy train. Rock on brother! :)

Edit: Time for bed.

You're going off the rails on a crazy train. Rock on brother! :)

Edit: Time for bed.

Same here.

Right, if we play semantics that would be valid. Who do you think he was talking about? Do you think his intent was to rile partisan politics or just make a case for his candidate? Do you think his comments do anything to make the country better? My belief is that we know full well he was talking about the Democrats. I think to ignore that is probably wishful thinking or just giving too much credit to Bush.

it likely had to do with the protesters outside breaking windows destroying property and such.

thats the reaction we had. i was expecting that he had the strength to stand up to russian aggression or iranian defiance or something but NOOOOOO he can stand up to angry liberals


Yah, but Putin and Amadinnerjacket will actually take names and fuck your shit up, unlike the american left, which is all hat and no cattle.

Yah, but Putin and Amadinnerjacket will actually take names and fuck your shit up, unlike the american left, which is all hat and no cattle.

Sort of like how Dear Leader kissed up to a nuked up North Korea and invaded a WMD-less Iraq. I notice the pattern.

Sort of like how Dear Leader kissed up to a nuked up North Korea and invaded a WMD-less Iraq. I notice the pattern.

Are you insulting the president?


STOP EMBOLDENING THE ENEMY!!!!

He's not running for reelection...he could pretty much do whatever the hell he wants as long as it's not illegal. If it works, go for it.

Are your forgetting the past 8 years? He's been able to do anything he wants EVEN IF IT IS ILLEGAL.

I can say whatever the hell I want too. I'm a goddamned polymath genius playwright and statesman, the father of modern armored warfare, and friend of all nations and peoples.

Top that.

I'm a Pope, and I think I've got a Saint card and a Messiah card floating around too. I don't think you can top that trifecta.

I can say whatever the hell I want too. I'm a goddamned polymath genius playwright and statesman, the father of modern armored warfare, and friend of all nations and peoples.

Top that.http://l.yimg.com/img.tv.yahoo.com/tv/us/img/site/82/85/0000038285_20070307180611.jpg
You're a fucking psy-cho.

it likely had to do with the protesters outside breaking windows destroying property and such.
Those Zany Anarchists and their bizarre antics.

As an aside, when this man passes away, Im drinking a bottle of fine wine and shooting off fireworks.

Just a bottle? And what about the dancing girls?:p

What they aren't angry?

I think my main point goes backs to "I'm a uniter, not a divider." He has then gone on to be the most divisive president in modern history. He's used wedge issues to pit "liberals against conservatives." He's done nothing to unite America. As a matter of fact, the only time Americans were united behind this president was on 9/11/01. Even then it had nothing to do with him, as anyone who was in office would have been given support at that time. He still uses that day as a crutch even when his approval rating is %26. Now that no one is buying it except a few rubes, he continues to divide America.

And here was me hoping he'd endorse Obama, just to mess with peoples heads.

What about the Angry Center?

Now, I wouldn't expect George Bush to have any more class now than he's proven to lack in the past. A sitting President attacking the Democrats as "the angry left" is just beyond even what I expect from him. Do you see this as a classless action of a sitting President, or is he right in attacking during the convention?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/02/bush.speech/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

Bush has done some awful things. However, this is not one of them. The left is angry. They actually have to run a campaign instead of having an easy cake walk into office. You have to remember that these are the scoundrels that do not like competition. You do not have to look farther than their contempt for capitalism to see that they hate competition. A bunch of spoiled brats. They remind me of those damned Kennedy kids.

Bush has done some awful things. However, this is not one of them. The left is angry. They actually have to run a campaign instead of having an easy cake walk into office. You have to remember that these are the scoundrels that do not like competition. You do not have to look farther than their contempt for capitalism to see that they hate competition. A bunch of spoiled brats. They remind me of those damned Kennedy kids.

Yeah! Its not like the Republicans are privalged and live a life of luxury or anyting!

I mean, its not like McCain has so many houses that the senile old loon forgot how many he had, right?



ps- He has 10.

What about the Angry Center?
I'm more worried about the Raging Above, although I'm not about to stop keeping an eye on the Infuriated Behind.

I watched that speech. Could they please try to ride the back of that hurricane just a little more?

I'm more worried about the Raging Above, although I'm not about to stop keeping an eye on the Infuriated Behind.

I ate one burritto and you just can't let it go. I swear the windows were stuck. I was trying to put them down.

I found this interesting...


"We live in a dangerous world," Bush said, speaking live via video. "And we need a president who understands the lessons of September 11, 2001: that to protect America, we must stay on the offense, stop attacks before they happen and not wait to be hit again."

Good thing that while we're on the "offense" against the nations that DID NOT hit us, that you've managed to start another Cold War. Good job protecting us.

Why do I blame, Mr. Bush, one might ask? Well, because when our standing military was capable of dealing with such a threat, a nation like Russia would not dare make the current bold attacks. And, no, this isn't about whether Russia is right or wrong. This is about the fact that military standoff prevents war and has for decades. By overcommitting our forces, there is no balance. We literally do not have to ability to react to more severe threats to international security because we're busy dealing with the quagmire that he calls "staying on the offense".

Now, I wouldn't expect George Bush to have any more class now than he's proven to lack in the past. A sitting President attacking the Democrats as "the angry left" is just beyond even what I expect from him. Do you see this as a classless action of a sitting President, or is he right in attacking during the convention?

I never thought about it that way until you mentioned it; I guess my expectations of him are so low that I forget he once promised to be a uniter. (I also thought it was pretty ballsy of him to mention the McCains' adopted daughter, considering what his campaign did in 2000.) That said, there was comparatively little attacking in his mostly positive speech, and I don't think it's entirely out of line to dis the Democrats in passing at a Republican convention. He continues to not live up to his campaign promises, but I don't think the speech was scandalous.

on the other hand i thought that fred thompson gave an excellent speech. i wonder if he wrote any of it.

He also dealt with the unfortunately-placed teleprompters the best. I felt so bad for the less-polished speakers who twisted from side to side trying to read their speeches, especially that nice man who was speaking about the volunteer program to help injured farmers.

But... the left are angry. How the fuck could you not be angry if you're in the left?

He also dealt with the unfortunately-placed teleprompters the best. I felt so bad for the less-polished speakers who twisted from side to side trying to read their speeches, especially that nice man who was speaking about the volunteer program to help injured farmers.

did the convention planners KNOW that this thing was going to be on tv? for most of thompsons AND liberman's speeches the background was painful on the eyes.

thompson's background seemed to be just glaring whiteness but turned out to be old photos of the mccain family that were fine when using a long shot. on tv it was awful

liebermans sky blue background--which seemed to be begging for a colbert report improvement contest--turned out to be an american flag flying against a blue sky. again only seen when the camera pulled far back.

they need to find someone who has some tv experience.

Bush has done some awful things. However, this is not one of them. The left is angry. They actually have to run a campaign instead of having an easy cake walk into office. You have to remember that these are the scoundrels that do not like competition. You do not have to look farther than their contempt for capitalism to see that they hate competition. A bunch of spoiled brats. They remind me of those damned Kennedy kids.

Yeah, I think a lot of people are angry with the way Bush has led this country. I don't think it's exclusive to the left or the right. He continues to try aqnd divide this country into with us or against us parts. He has done more to divide this country then any president in modern history, Also, are you claiming the Kennedy's have corned the market on spoiled rich kids? Just look at the Bush family alone. Pill poppers, savings and loan scam artists, squandered business deal and massive losses because just being a Bush wasn't enough to seal the deal.