Quote:
Originally posted by shakran
So have I. What's your point? I frankly expect excellence from the commander in chief. Are you saying you're fine with mediocrity in the highest office in the nation?
|
I'm saying that ONE area of mediocrity does not make the man mediocre.
Quote:
Originally posted by shakran
Down from 89% of the voters on his side after 9/11. I call that a pretty damn big slide. What could possibly account for it other than voters (who matter) losing faith in him?
|
Imagine that, the numbers fell in the years since a massive tragedy. Who'd have thunk it. No one expected it to remain that high and there is no possibility that it could have. We won't know how much faith they've lost until the election results are in.
Quote:
Originally posted by shakran
No, it's both. Do you think that had Bush Sr. been shot and Quayle had become president, that people would have taken him seriously? He made such a total fool of himself every time he opened his mouth in public that people went in to private sessions already looking down on him. Public appearances effect what happens in private.
|
It's what goes on behind closed doors that influence policy
most. Obviously I didn't say it doesn't matter at all.
Quote:
Originally posted by shakran
And that wasn't the only complaint I had about him in this thread (or others) either. The troops (the smart ones anyway) are losing faith in him for many other reasons. Even the ones who supported the war cannot appreciate the fact that Bush did not send enough troops to support the invasion force. That attack the other day on the 20 truck fuel convoy that was being guarded by all of 3 humvees is a shining example. There simply aren't enough soldiers over there, and it's made the situation far more dangerous for the ones that are there as a result.
|
Please show me your evidence that the "smart" troops are losing faith in him. There's no question there were enough troops to support the invasion force, if there wasn't how could it have been successful? Citing one example of a successful attack as evidence of too few troops in the entire country is not exactly strong proof of your theory.