thew Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 I don't like Bush, as all know. None of his speaches have ever gotten more than a 5 with me. He's no Bill Clinton and he's certainly not a Ronald Reagan. Still, I give the President a stong 7 on this speach.... Best speach he's had in quite a while in my book... He seriously flubbed pronouncing Abu Ghraib but other than that his delivery was pretty fair. Talked nice about European allies, and he also spoke nice about the UN... Good Moves. No exit strategy which was not good. But he did have a suprise.. a pledge to Turn over "full" soverenty for Iraq instead of limited soverenty end of June. I thought that was a bold message.. Looks like there is a light on in there after all.... I Hope there is follow through.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 you know. Its funny. The President speaks and there are a couple of people here who are considered liberals....and they say he did an alright job. But.......you'd think the supporters of the Prez and the guys who think he's going to blow out Kerry, would be here screaming "Slam Dunk!"...and they aren't. This happened last time also. freaky how that works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 Originally posted by Bufford 3.3 The President speaks and there are a couple of people here who are considered liberals....and they say he did an alright job. Doesn't surprise me. When our President goes on TV and promises the destruction of a prison and a new attempt to improve conditions liberals are inspired. Admitting errors and seaking to fix them is what liberalism is partly about. Things like the Presidents speech tonight are what leftists want to hear. Sadly at the end of the day politics will make moments like this short lived. The issues will not die or be ignored by any, but it's no surprise that at moments like this liberals, some at least, are willing to give Bush credit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thew Posted May 25, 2004 Author Share Posted May 25, 2004 Bufford 3.3 what did you think? Good bad.. 1 to 10? One huge problem with Bush has always been that he can't deliver a speach, he can't frame a vision, and he doesn't inspire. I thought this speach was pretty good. He had a suprise about the full soverenty. Smart move jumping ahead of Kerry who is still in "stay the course mode". I also thought the demolition of Abu Ghraib was a master stoke. I thought it really resonated. I didn't like that he doesn't have an exit strategy yet. Although the new Iraqi government will probable ask us to leave, which I'm thinking would be fine with George. I also like that he's getting the UN involved. One weak link here is the UN so far isn't getting much love from the factions in forming the interum government. I think the Kurds are balking at being the third bannana. Still Bush did the right move by letting them live that headache. I give him a strong 7. If he gives one of these speaches every week for six weeks as is planned, he could still make this election a horse race.... Best speach he's had since taking office. If this is the kind of work Karen Hughes does Bush would be crazy to let that lady go back to Texas.. I would sign her up through the election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 I think he said a lot of what needs to be done.....but left out a lot of how it'll BE done. I'll give him a 7 or "C". Passing grade because it was the right ideas......but nothing great because they weren't new, original ideas.....and in fact, its stuff that should of been the goal in the past. He's right, its going to get ugly over there......more ugly than it already is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thew Posted May 25, 2004 Author Share Posted May 25, 2004 Passing grade because it was the right ideas...... I thought it was better than passing. It was a corner. It was damage control and it was potentially getting Iraq back on track. but nothing great because they weren't new, original ideas.....and in fact, its stuff that should of been the goal in the past. Yes and no.. I thought he did have new ideas. I thought full soverenty was a new and surprising statement. I thought that tearing down the Icon of the abuses was also new ( at least for Bush ). Strong symbolism..... I do agree with you that these new goals should have been his goals all along. That's a good point. Still I give him credit for getting out of the woods and back on the path. Anyway... He's got a long way to go.. But this is the first time he's shown me anything in quite a while.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 I give him a 4 and I am a supporter. NOT A CONSERVATIVE. I think he started great. He hemmered out the reasons why we were there and what the goal is. He needed to spell that out clearly. I think an opinion on the incidents at Abu-Ghraib or better yet, a strong announcement of what will happen to the participants was what people really should have gotten from him. A clear pronunciation of the place would have helped too.:doh: Dub, WTF? He indirectly said that militiamen and terrorists who stand in the way of the uniformed forces will be captured or killed. I think it would have been a bold move to put a bounty on both Sadr's and Zaraquawi's (sp?) heads. He should have done more to label them both equally public enemt #1. I felt alienated from the speech. Even if I were a neo-liberal, I would have felt alienated. Much of this speech was adressed to the anti-s, and Iraqis but very little of it felt it was adressed to Americans. I'd personally like to know more specific dates. When will more nations come to help us there? When some of our soldiers get to come home? When will we attempt to make the paper trail of where the weapons went? When when when.... I don't care about the how. I know we are more than capable of the how. No need explaining the why. You either agree or you want us the hell out. I was just left with too many questions and felt that the Pres didn't stick up for himself and his supporters like he should have. It was a spitting image of the last speech, minus the horrid Q & A session. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
du7st Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 D-. I got nothing out of the speech. He could have at least had a Q+A session at the end but after his last performance with Q+A during a prime time speech, it's understandable why he wouldn't. And I actually liked the speech back in March (?). It was a time when things were going awry and he reminded us that we have a job to do and we need to stay the course and stick together. It's gonna take more than that to give him any credit at this point, however. Shouting freedom freedom sovernity and freedom does not settle my great concerns about the (mis)management of our war effort. Better luck next time 'dub. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smsmith40 Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 OK, I'll admit it. Over the last couple of years I have been far too critical of Bush. This speech has shown me the error of my ways. . . . I was wrong Bush CAN walk and talk at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 I thought it was o.k. As a teacher of the MCSE and such I've stepped all over my words and he doesnt get to do a rasberry and continue on . Watch all the out-takes with news and weather people... His message was good. I hope they do well with their country so we can at least get the forces down to what they are in Korea before the 50 year mark... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 My problem with his speach was, at least as near as I can tell, several of the things he said he was going to do, don't match with the things he's said in writing he's going to do. Maybe he's got a different definition than I do, but he several times promised "full sovreignity" on 6/30, but the proposal we've put before the UN gives the Iraqis no controll over any military force whatsoever at that time. The closest it comes is that when the new government takes over in Jan '05, then there will be a committee formed, with an Iraqi majority, which will have the authority to approve "major" military operations. Even at that time, the military will remain under an American commander, although Iraqi units will be allowed to join, under Iraqi commanders (as long as the Iraqi commanders are under US command.) (And, even after Jan, it still doesn't say the Iraqis will have the authority to ask up to leave.) As I said, maybe he's got a different definition than I do, but "full sovreignity" doesn't include "my army stays put, under my command". (I remember there were at least two places where the speach differed with what I remember about the UN proposal, but while I was typing this, the other place must have fallen out my other ear. Hopefully, I'll find it again.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OURYEAR#56 Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 I didn't see the speech. But I have a question: Why are we turning over Iraq completely on June 30. Wouldn't that undermine our reaosn for waring with Iraq in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 Why do you think we went to war OY? I didnt watch the speech. So I cant comment. Too nice of an evening to be indoors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 The one thing I was happy to see him talk about was the work and progress we have already made. He talked about creating 30,000 new jobs for teachers, he was very specific about what we have accomplished as far as putting people in position to take over power. He discussed the freedom and liberty that we have created for the Iraqi people and wasnt a afraid to admit that they do not want us there. Good speech I thought, It was a hell of alot better than his press conference. Alot of people give him a hard time because he is not a great public speaker, my question for you is... do you need to be a good public speaker to be a great leader, in my opinion you dont. Kind of off subject but, personally I dont think Gibbs is a great public speaker however he is an awesome leader and we all know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 Originally posted by Larry My problem with his speach was, at least as near as I can tell, several of the things he said he was going to do, don't match with the things he's said in writing he's going to do. Maybe he's got a different definition than I do, but he several times promised "full sovreignity" on 6/30, but the proposal we've put before the UN gives the Iraqis no controll over any military force whatsoever at that time. The closest it comes is that when the new government takes over in Jan '05, then there will be a committee formed, with an Iraqi majority, which will have the authority to approve "major" military operations. Even at that time, the military will remain under an American commander, although Iraqi units will be allowed to join, under Iraqi commanders (as long as the Iraqi commanders are under US command.) (And, even after Jan, it still doesn't say the Iraqis will have the authority to ask up to leave.) As I said, maybe he's got a different definition than I do, but "full sovreignity" doesn't include "my army stays put, under my command". (I remember there were at least two places where the speach differed with what I remember about the UN proposal, but while I was typing this, the other place must have fallen out my other ear. Hopefully, I'll find it again.) Do you think it would e a great idea to pack up and leave the country the way it is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 I think the point is....people don't want to hear what's happened already over there. They want to know. "What's next?"......details.....specifics......not just "We're going to create my jobs for Iraqis" or whatever. They want to know HOW we're going to do this. I think that's the stuff that's missing. Overall, I still give it a decent grade. Not great, not awful.....just there. Interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNumberOne Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 Originally posted by Kilmer17 Why do you think we went to war OY? I didnt watch the speech. So I cant comment. Too nice of an evening to be indoors. I too didn't watch the speech. I read the post summary this morning - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53141-2004May24.html - and I have to ask - is Mad Mike a Bush speechwriter, or are these just the Republican talking points about the war? This really sounds a lot like Mad Mike explaining why we went to Iraq. relevant parts from the article- *excerpt 1* In effect, the president said his current plan is good enough to win, and he set out to rally Americans to his cause with rousing language that placed the conflict in Iraq in the context of the larger, more popular battle against terrorism. "Our terrorist enemies have a vision that guides and explains all their varied acts of murder," Bush said. "They seek to impose Taliban-like rule, country by country, across the greater Middle East." He asserted that extremists now see Iraq as "the central front in the war on terror." *excerpt 2* Throughout his address at the Army War College, Bush tried to generate new support for his Iraq strategy by contrasting two strikingly different scenarios for the future -- "one of tyranny and murder, the other of liberty and life." Tough times in the coming months will be offset by prospect of hopeful change in the years ahead, he said. Echoing a theme from a year ago after the ouster of Saddam Hussein, the president evoked his broad "vision" of a new Iraq inspiring freedom that will "advance and change lives in the greater Middle East." He also waxed eloquent about a future for the people of the Middle East that would allow them to "reclaim the greatness of their own heritage." The alternative, Bush warned, is the descent of Iraq and the region into extremism. "The failure of freedom would only mark the beginning of peril and violence," he said. The terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, were an undercurrent throughout the speech, as the president sought to rekindle the public acclaim associated with the broader war on terrorism that began by toppling the Taliban in Afghanistan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 Originally posted by Bufford 3.3 I think the point is....people don't want to hear what's happened already over there. They want to know. "What's next?"......details.....specifics......not just "We're going to create my jobs for Iraqis" or whatever. They want to know HOW we're going to do this. I think that's the stuff that's missing. Overall, I still give it a decent grade. Not great, not awful.....just there. Interesting. I think telling people what we have accomplished is very important, not every one hears about accomplishments, nor do they hear about the positives that are coming ut of Iraq. I think alot of people seem to think it is just a big quagmire, and that we are not making any progress at all. Hopefully people realized that Iraq isnt just a mess that we will never be able to fix, I thought he did a good job of telling us accomplishments and what other goals we have to get Iraq back on track. Most importantly, I hope the Iraqis can see after last nights speech that we are there to help and that we are not going to leave them hanging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 do you think that's more important than explaining how we're going to proceed over the next few months.....years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 Originally posted by Bufford 3.3 do you think that's more important than explaining how we're going to proceed over the next few months.....years? He did say we are giving control on June 30th Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 I thought he did that as well, if he would have went into great detail he would have lost the ears of alot of people. You could probably find a more detailed outline of what the plan is online some where. He talked about elections, security and our plans to possibly send over more troops, building their forces, working on the infrastucture of the government and the economy, he talked about using their oil to generate more money for Iraq. I am sure this plan is very detailed and thousands of pages long. He covered the basics of the 5 steps and put it into perspective of how we plan on putting this plan into place. Every should have known this isnt going to happen over night, I predict we will have our troops over there for at least anouther 10 years, which is fine by me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 I think it is AS important. Especially considering the slanted negative view portrayed daily in the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 So where are the people that said this was a war about oil when Bush said last night all the oil is going to the Iraqi people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 Originally posted by jbooma So where are the people that said this was a war about oil when Bush said last night all the oil is going to the Iraqi people No Doubt , they are out looking for a different excuse. What was the number 6 Billion dollars so far, in 6 months. Not bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cskin Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 I didn't watch the speech.... it's just to painful for me to watch. I like what Bush stands for.... but he's not even an avergage orator. Let me guess... it sounded alot like... "Terror......A-Merica.... Peaceful Nation..... compassionate..... terror.... Al-Qaeda.... evil dictator...... tyranny...... terror.... .. nation..... A-Merica..... evil doers....... terror...... nation.......those opposing freedom........ democracy.....terror......A-Merica..... Thank you and God Bless America." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.