Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 04-17-2008, 09:47 PM   #1 (permalink)
Banned
 
Bush's Supporters; What Is the Appropriate Way to Relate To Them After He Leaves?

Bush is leaving office nine months from now. This is recent reporting on his record in his seven years, three months in office:


Quote:
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/news-des...-to-worse.html
President Bush's Poll Numbers Are Going From Bad to Worse
April 11, 2008 04:34 PM ET | Kenneth T. Walsh | Permanent Link


President Bush is spending the weekend at his Texas ranch. But there's no escape from bad news in the ratings department.

The latest Associated Press-Ipsos poll finds that only 28 percent of Americans approve of the job Bush is doing, a new low. He was at 30 percent last month. The pollsters said one big reason is deepening voter dissatisfaction with the economy, which is in a serious downturn.....


Quote:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/34030.html
Jonathan Landay GAO: Bush lacks strategy to wipe out bin Laden sanctuary
By Jonathan S. Landay | McClatchy Newspapers
Posted on Thursday, April 17, 2008 email | print tool nameclose
tool goes here
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration doesn't have a comprehensive strategy for eliminating Osama bin Laden's sanctuary in Pakistan's tribal region and preventing the region from being used for launching terrorist attacks on the United States, the investigative arm of Congress said Thursday.

President Bush and his senior lieutenants frequently claim that eradicating the threat that bin Laden's al Qaida terrorist network poses to United States and its allies is their top national-security priority.

But in a scathing report, the Government Accountability Office said there was no plan that "includes all elements of national power — diplomatic, military, intelligence, development assistance, economic and law enforcement support — called for by the various national-security strategies and Congress."

Al Qaida established its sanctuary in Pakistan's tribal region when bin Laden and his followers fled Afghanistan after the 2001 U.S.-led intervention.

"No comprehensive strategy for meeting U.S. national-security goals" in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas has been developed even though the administration's counter-terrorism policy, congressional legislation and the mission of the National Counter-Terrorism Center mandate such an approach, the report says.

It says that the Bush administration has relied primarily on the Pakistani military to address the threat to American national security.

About 96 percent of some $5.8 billion that the United States provided to Pakistan from 2002 to 2007 to address the problem in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and adjoining districts has gone to reimbursing the Pakistani military for the costs of its operations, according to the report.

But Pakistan, which deployed 120,000 troops and paramilitary forces in the rugged Massachusetts-size region, has failed to eliminate al Qaida and allied militants based there even though it's killed and captured hundreds of extremists while losing about 1,400 of its own forces.

"It is appalling that there is still no comprehensive, interagency strategy concerning this critical region, and this lack of foresight is harming U.S. national security," said Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., the chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, which requested the report.

ON THE WEB

The GAO report: http://hcfa.house.gov/110/GAO041708.pdf
Last summer's GAO report on Iraq....white house "reluctance" to share it, triggered a leaking of it:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/pdf/200...%20report2.pdf

Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...pinion/columns

<FONT SIZE="+2"><B>The Vacation President</B></FONT><br/><P><FONT SIZE="-1">By Dan Froomkin<br/>Special to washingtonpost.com<br/>Tuesday, March 4, 2008; 1:02 PM<BR></FONT><P><p>President Bush famously, if unjustifiably, casts himself as Ronald Reagan's disciple. But in at least one way, he has surpassed his master.</p><p>According to the meticulous records kept by CBS Radio White House correspondent Mark Knoller, Bush on Monday lodged his 879th day spent in whole or in part at Camp David or his sprawling estate in Crawford, Tex.</p><p>By comparison, the 40th president only -- only! -- spent all or part of 866 days at Camp David or his ranch in California during his eight years in office, according to the Reagan Library. (By my count, Bush actually beat Reagan's mark on Dec. 30, during his Christmas vacation in Crawford.)</p><p>This, of course, is not the noblest of records to break. Reagan was frequently derided for his laid-back, hands-off approach to his job. He even poked fun of himself at the 1987 Gridiron Dinner: "It's true hard work never killed anybody, but I figure, why take the chance?"</p><p>And, of course, Bush still has almost a year to go. His will almost certainly be a record for the ages.</p><p>Bush's current tally represents a little more than a third of his presidency. And that's not counting the 39 days that Knoller says he spent in whole or in part at the Bush family compound in Kennebunkport, Me. All in all, Knoller says, Bush has made 134 separate visits to Camp David, 70 to Crawford and 10 to Kennebunkport in a little over seven years.</p><p>Knoller didn't set out to be the chronicler of Bush's indolence. In fact, in our e-mail correspondence, he shied away from calling Bush's time away "vacation." Says Knoller: "I agree that he can never really be 'on vacation' - since the job is always with him."</p><p>Knoller explains that he started collecting presidential travel data during the early days of the Clinton presidency. "I though it would be helpful to my radio reports to say how often he visited certain key states. So I started logging those visits. Then time 'on vacation'. . . . Then pardons, vetoes, addresses to the nation, rounds of golf, commencement speeches, foreign trips, news conferences, etc, etc.</p><p>"I liked having these little information nuggets that were not readily available elsewhere."</p><p>Bush's aides go to great pains to point out that even during his frequent getaways from the office, he continues to do some, if not a lot, of work. He receives daily national security briefings, signs documents and sometimes holds teleconferences. An invitation to hang out with Bush at Camp David or Crawford is seen as a reward for friendly foreign leaders.</p><p>But at some key points in his administration, Bush has been on vacation. For instance, he spent a month in Crawford shortly before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, when critics say he should have been more attentive to warning signs.</p><p><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A15957-2001Aug29&notFound=true" target="">Mike Allen</a> wrote in The Washington Post in August of 2001, as Bush's first long Crawford vacation wrapped up: &quot;The length of the trip revived old questions about Bush's work ethic.&quot; Of course, no one knew at the time that Bush had, during the first week of that vacation, waved off the now-famous memo specifically for the president titled &quot; <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2285-2004Apr10?language=printer" target="">Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US</a>.&quot; According to author <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=gV3m6sYhnrsC&pg=PA2&dq=%22+covered+your+ass%22+suskind&ei=eHTNR5PYAqHeyATtxIHkAw&sig=j9X0bhAIixgatP0xDb_IySF6cZk" target="">Ron Suskind</a>, Bush heard his CIA briefer out -- then told him, &quot;All right. You've covered your ass, now.&quot;</p><p>The very next day, as <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A2676-2004Apr10&notFound=true" target="">Dana Milbank and Mike Allen</a> wrote in The Post in April 2004, Bush ran into reporters while playing golf at a nearby country club and &quot;seemed carefree as he spoke about the books he was reading, the work he was doing on his nearby ranch, his love of hot-weather jogging, his golf game and his 55th birthday.&quot;</p><p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/06/washington/06bush.html?_r=1&oref=slogin" target="">Sheryl Gay Stolberg</a> wrote in the New York Times in August 2006 that Bush was actually cutting short his time in Crawford that summer for symbolic purposes. &quot;Last August . . . began with highly publicized protests by [Cindy] Sheehan, whose son was killed in Iraq, and ended with the image of the president on vacation while New Orleans drowned, an image that helped start his slide in popularity.&quot;</p><p>Nevertheless, he was <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/08/08/BL2006080800490.html" target="">on vacation</a> as Israel dropped bombs on Lebanon later that month.</p><p><a href="http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/mason/5042364.html" target="">Julie Mason</a> noted in the Houston Chronicle this past August that Bush was fast approaching Reagan's record. She wrote: &quot;The 1,600-acre ranch has proved a durable haven for Bush, who often disappears into its varied landscapes for days or weeks at a time without public appearances. He has an attractive stone house, shaded swimming pool, miles of rugged bike trails and law enforcement at every entry point keeping people out.&quot;</p><p>In my May 8, 2006, column, &quot; <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/05/08/BL2006050800788.html" target="">Would Bush Rather Be Fishing</a>?&quot;, I wondered if Bush doesn't really enjoy his day job. A few days earlier, when asked by a German tabloid to name the most wonderful moment of his presidency, Bush said it came while he was on vacation, fishing on his private lake.</p>
President Bush's supporters include almost all republican members of the house and senate, the unelected officials of the republican party, and polls suggest, just under thirty percent of American adults.

They are sponsoring a candidate to replace Mr. Bush who seems to support all of Mr. Bush's policies. The candidate, John McCain, is actually, with the support of the supporters of the outgoing president, running on Bush's "record". He advocates even deeper tax cuts, with no plan to replace the tax revenue, and the same economically draining, grinding down the US military, open ended occupation of Iraq by US troops at present levels.

So, how do we relate to Bush's supporters? Aren't they unapologetic, unphased by any of the details reported above? Do we act like nothing has happened, that we simply continue to have different political opinions, or does there come a point where the dynamic should appropriately change, given the above information?

Is Bush's record, as described by the non-partisan GAO, months shy of a "war on terror", lasting seven years, so far....that Bush himself proclaimed, coupled with his "attendance record" during those "war years", enough of a shock to your sensibilities to seriously question whether Bush or his supporters are even "for real"?

Would it help if they tried to explain themselves? Are you still willing to listen? Is it unreasonable not to want to? What more information of Bush's failings and contradictions would have to be documented to make it reasonable?

Why do you think that Bush supporters are not negatively influenced by the details reported in the articles included in this post?
host is offline  
Old 04-17-2008, 10:53 PM   #2 (permalink)
Upright
 
37OHSSV's Avatar
 
Location: Lesbian trapped in a man's body
I'll probably relate by not making silly troll threads like this one.

37OHSSV is offline  
Old 04-17-2008, 11:24 PM   #3 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 37OHSSV
I'll probably relate by not making silly troll threads like this one.

http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/m...SV/BushBIG.jpg
I thought that the determination by the non-partisan GAO, that, after 6 years, there was still no coordinated plan implemented by the executive branch to use all resources of the government to eliminate the Bin Laden national security threat, was shocking.

Considering that the president has spent all or part of more than 900 days of his total time in office in either Crawford, Camp David, or Kennebunkport (130 days per each of the past 7 years...), and still is reviewed in this scathing way by the GAO, how is his judgment and priorities to be defended?

Can support for the president, in light of the GAO report combined with the amount of time he is reported to have spent away from the white house during his presidency, be put into words?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ustwo
...I'm sorry, but I thought we were fighting a war here, this isn't a 'nice' thing, and I do not see waterboarding as a big deal as compared to the consequences of prolonged terror attacks....

-from the "Is Waterboarding Torture? thread
I don't see limiting vacation time to less than a record setting level, for the duration, and developing a comprehensive plan to counter Bin Laden, as unreasonable expectations of a "war president", by the population he purports to be "keeping safe".

Doesn't this information contradict much of the justification made by the president and vice-president, in the 2004 election campaign, for the voters giving them a second term?

Aren't the very same people who support the president, supporting a successor to the president who promises to follow the same policies as the president? How do they justify doing this? Is justification based on the effectiveness of the current president?

Is there even an attempt at justification?

Last edited by host; 04-18-2008 at 12:57 AM..
host is offline  
Old 04-17-2008, 11:30 PM   #4 (permalink)
Confused Adult
 
Shauk's Avatar
 
Location: Spokane, WA
Seeing his approval numbers that low really does make me think the bastard stole the election, and that republicans refuse to admit they were stupid to vote for him.

Who's flip flopping now? bitches!
Shauk is offline  
Old 04-18-2008, 12:22 AM   #5 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shauk
Seeing his approval numbers that low really does make me think the bastard stole the election, and that republicans refuse to admit they were stupid to vote for him....
The problem is that they refuse to admit that there is anything they refuse to admit:

Quote:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/13/...ney-brilliant/

<div class="ie"><h2><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/13/matalin-cheney-brilliant/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link to Matalin: ‘This Brilliant Man’ — Dick Cheney — ‘Has Changed The Nature Of’ The Vice Presidency">Matalin: ‘This Brilliant Man’ — Dick Cheney — ‘Has Changed The Nature Of’ The Vice Presidency</a></h2>
<div class="ie_filed">
<span class="post_info"> Filed Under: <a href="#"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org?tag=Politics" rel="tag" title="View all posts tagged Politics">Politics</a><br /></a></span>
</div>
<div class="ie_filed2">

By <span class="authorname"><a href="/author/Faiz">Faiz</a></span> on Apr 13th, 2008 at 1:26 pm </div>
</div>

<div class="ie_body">
<div class="entryContent">
<h2 class="title"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/13/matalin-cheney-brilliant/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to 'Matalin: ‘This Brilliant Man’ — Dick Cheney — ‘Has Changed The Nature Of’ The Vice Presidency'">Matalin: ‘This Brilliant Man’ — Dick Cheney — ‘Has Changed The Nature Of’ The Vice Presidency</a><span class="storyexpander"><a class="storyexpander" id="exlink1-19090">&raquo;</a></span></h2>
<p>In the span of 30 seconds on this morning’s Meet the Press, former Cheney adviser Mary Matalin offered a series of <a href="http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/04/13/mary-matalin-cheney-is-brilliant-and-people-are-sick-of-bush-bashing-stuff/">bewildering, eye-opening statements</a> in defense of the Bush administration.</p>
<p>Asked who John McCain should pick as Vice President, Matalin offered that the candidate must have “good cred on having experience across the board.” She argued:</p>
<blockquote><p><strong>Dick Cheney has changed the nature of that office. This brilliant man has made that office completely relevant.</strong></p></blockquote>
<p>Indeed, Cheney — who has argued that his office is not “<a href="http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?id=1371">an entity within the executive branch</a>” — has <a href="http://blog.washingtonpost.com/cheney/">changed the nature of the office</a> in many destructive ways, operating in secrecy and <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2008/03/19/cheney-poll-iraq/">callously disregarding</a> the views of the American public.</p>
<p>Host Tim Russert then asked whether Condoleezza Rice would make a suitable Vice President. Matalin said:</p>
<blockquote><p>You know, people don’t know about Dr. Rice is that <strong>she weighed in on every domestic issue before the President.</strong></p></blockquote>
<p>Recall, Rice was the <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/ricebio.html">National Security Adviser</a> to Bush in his first term before becoming Secretary of State. Despite having a <a href="http://www.ontheissues.org/Condoleezza_Rice.htm">very thin record</a> on domestic policy issues, she was apparently one of Bush’s key domestic policy advisers, too. </p>
<p>When Russert noted that the selection of Rice would signify a “third Bush term,” Matalin responded, “People are sick of this Bush-bashing stuff.” In fact, as a <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/11/bushs-approval-rating-at-all-time-low-of-28-percent/">recent Gallup poll</a> shows, people are simply sick of Bush. Watch Matalin’s comments:</p>
<p><center><object width="320" height="240">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dHBMzOfKcYs"> </param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dHBMzOfKcYs" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="320" height="240"> </embed> </object></center></p>
host is offline  
Old 04-18-2008, 02:38 AM   #6 (permalink)
let me be clear
 
ottopilot's Avatar
 
Location: Waddy Peytona
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shauk
Seeing his approval numbers that low really does make me think the bastard stole the election, and that republicans refuse to admit they were stupid to vote for him.

Who's flip flopping now? bitches!
Feeling nostalgic are we? Ah yes ... the 2000 election was stolen ... good times.

Lets take a stroll down memory lane ...





__________________
"It rubs the lotion on Buffy, Jodi and Mr. French's skin" - Uncle Bill from Buffalo
ottopilot is offline  
Old 04-18-2008, 03:12 AM   #7 (permalink)
has all her shots.
 
mixedmedia's Avatar
 
Location: Florida
I don't see this going anywhere. I don't see how anyone can seriously relate to this question, nor why they would want to.
__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce
mixedmedia is offline  
 

Tags
bush, leaves, relate, supporters

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:22 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360