posted on July 19, 2001 03:21:40 AM
Last week there was a well covered visit by Bush to the Jefferson Memorial during which there was a lot of film showing him greeting and shaking hands with random visitors who appeared to be there, like you and I might, to tour the memorial as part of a vacation trip to the capitol.
But now letters to the Washington Post editors describe something different. Normal or coincidental visitors were kept away while Bush was there.
posted on July 19, 2001 07:54:43 AM
Interesting letters. It could be that they allow a few people in so they could get the warm & fuzzy photos, while keeping the vast majority out.
posted on July 19, 2001 08:24:23 AM
"President John F. Kennedy recognized Jefferson's accomplishments when he told a gathering of American Nobel Prize winners that they were the greatest assemblage of talent in the White House since Jefferson had dinner there alone. With his strong beliefs in the rights of man and a government derived from the people, in freedom of religion and the separation between church and state, and in education available to all. Thomas Jefferson struck a chord for human liberty 200 years ago that resounds through the decades. But in the end, Jefferson's own appraisal of his life, and the one that he wrote for use on his own tombstone, suffices: "Author of the Declaration of American Independence, of the Statute of Virginia for religious freedom, and Father of the University"
Only an annointed president would bring his private audience to the Jefferson Memorial for a staged photo op.
While there, George managed to speak a few words...
"Well, it's an unimaginable honor to be the president during the Fourth of July of this country. It means what these words say, for starters. The great inalienable rights of our country. We're blessed with such values in America. And I—it's—I'm a proud man to be the nation based upon such wonderful values.
posted on July 19, 2001 11:28:37 AM
Yes we have the same thing here when the president comes to town. All the overpasses are closed and the traffic on public streets disrupted to allow complete safety for the motor convoy.
It says something is seriously wrong if the man is so hated that the only way he can be kept alive is to be totally isolated from the underclass.
I am sure those "visitors" were brought in from a group of carefully screened and well searched government or party members who are well known.
It is wrong that we should have elected officials treated the same as was customary for kings of old. No one could approuch or display a weapon in their presence without leave.
Face it folks we are not a sovereign people.
We are ruled from above with an iron hand.
The whole concept of the founding fathers is no longer a reality in our modern nation - it is corrupted beyond recognition.
posted on July 19, 2001 10:37:57 PM
Remember a while back where the GOP hired a bunch of highly-paid lobbists to dress up "as common folk" and there were to appear at some media event where the GOP was pushing a bill? The lobbisits were to be filmed appearing to support the GOP bill while pretending to be average blue-collar workers. And even though this dodge was exposed by the media well in advance, the GOP put on the show after all -- at which point the media reminded everyone who the "workers" really were.
posted on July 19, 2001 10:53:55 PM
Here I sit, browsing around, and wind up guffawing out loud (which I havent done in some time, I might add)...LOL @ saabsister and krs's quote of Bushboy.
posted on July 19, 2001 10:56:03 PM
Now that I have myself under semi control, wiping tears from cheeks, I wonder....how the hell republicans can be proud of that idiot? How, I ask. Hes a buffoon and an embarassment to the whole USA.
posted on July 20, 2001 10:10:57 AM
Nothing is as exciting as jumping into the lions den, so I'll pump up my old heart by offering the following: Don't judge GW, by his public speaking. That would be a mistake. He was a superior governor and he will do well as president.
It's easy to mock his verbal gaffs, but you may want to follow his accomplishments. As an indicator, you may wish to read the about what is actually happening with his foreign policy. I don't know how to do ubb links, so you may need to cut and paste this article.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/editorial/972280
posted on July 20, 2001 12:14:17 PM" I wonder....how the hell republicans can be proud of that idiot? How, I ask. Hes a buffoon and an embarassment to the whole USA." -Hepburn-
That reminds me of the parents of the emotionally disturbed children I used to work with. The parents were the cause of their kid's emotional problems, through inadequacy, through bad examples, through a lot of negligence and lack of participation in their kid's lives. They had a large quantity of ignorance too.
What Republicans who voted for Bush and won't roll over to how disparaging to all America and Americans that he is reminds me of the most annoying trait those parents showed: those parents never apologized for anything. Never. Not once. They'd make up to each other, but would never in the slightest attempt to apologize to one another -- or to anyone else that they harmed. I asked them several times why this was and all I ever got was a shrug. And I think that's all we'll ever get from Republicans when it comes to their fanatic choice of George Bush, jr. as President.
I realize that this opinion reflects only on south of thr border policy, as time passes, you will see similar progress in other areas of his foreign policy. Instead of calling names and poking fun of a few gaffs, lets discuss policy failures and sucesses.
The article is significant, because it was written by a Democrat. This guy is hardly a Republican cheerleader.
McLarty was President Clinton's first chief of staff and also served as special envoy for the Americas. He is vice chairman of Kissinger McLarty Associates, a strategic advisory firm in Washington, D.C.
Pardon me for being tardy. The link you offered up was a little large to digest in one sitting. I thought I was going to have to answer each and every charge on the site. That's pretty scarey for a one finger typest.However, I was saved, by reading the opening paragraph, which I shall paste below.
"Statistics from various sources (as noted) on Texas under George W. Bush. Bush did not cause these problems, but he accepted them as the way "things just are" and showed indifference or worse to them. There was plenty here for a "reformer with results" to pay attention to. But there was no reform, and no results."
To answer your question: "Superior to what?", I have to say surerior to the Democrats that ran the State before. GW was the first Republican govenor since reconstruction, which ended in 1874. This begs the question: If we have all these problems in Texas, and GW didn't cause them, who caused them? I don't think you will like the answer. May I refer you to the link you provided for your answer.
posted on July 21, 2001 01:02:44 AM
What difference does it make who caused the problems.? Bush was elected on his promises to fix the problems, and he did not do that. Texas is still mired in the lowest levels of recordable acheivement in the country. He had a chance to make it better but all he did was make money for himself and his friends.
Still, tex1, it appears that you never got past the first page of the link provided by snowyegret. Go back. See the sidebar toward the left?
Yeah, the retching would have made the PA systems screeech.