I, like you, have given up on Bush ever giving a decent speech again. He wasn't always this bad, something happened. He is overcoached or something.
But I remember him giving some excellent speeches. It seems he's lost all confidence.Comment Posted By Kate On 23.01.2007 @ 18:52
Rick, the President is an emotional guy. While I don't deny he's had a rough run, I recall reading about Bush crying at a televised cabinet meeting right after 9/11. Colin Powell, in his usual self-serving way, commented in a Bob Woodward book that he was concerned with the President showing such weakness right after the attacks and what the enemy would think.
Bush will earn his salary in the months ahead. He will have to turn this around on the ground and mount a much better communications effort. He needs to counter the media in him speeches and media events, but he needs a communications "blitz" to counter the coordinated media attemtps to destroy him and his policy.
Tears at a memorial ceremony for a true American hero do not concern me, they move me. His poor delivery of his critical speech does concern me, since it makes me wonder what's up with this White House team.Comment Posted By Kate On 12.01.2007 @ 18:54
I think it's wrong to take Iranian hostages and hold them indefinitley. However, holding them for a nice even number of days, say 444, would be fine. We are just following the lead of our Iranian friends.
OT-why, oh, why, can't President Bush deliver a decent speech. The downward trend started in his 2004 State of the Union speech, through the debates, to this day. He needed to hit it out of the park Wednesday and instead gave a nervous, timid performance.
He needs to be coached by a good communication. His communication skills are getting worse, not better, and it is having a very negative effect on his policies.Comment Posted By Kate On 12.01.2007 @ 08:08
I still think we can pull this out, but it has to be fought on the battlefield but there needs to be a communication team to counter the overwhelmingly hostile media. Of course, facts on the ground will be what counts, but the president has to communicate the stakes. He's been terrible doing that.Comment Posted By Kate On 14.12.2006 @ 20:40
I just wrote a long post, which I lost. This one is much shorter. I don't believe it is laziness or lack of passion, it's bias, arrogance and group think. Look has they went after the Jessica Lynch story to debunk that and how they investigated the Haditha story. They can be pretty darn energetic when they are going after the military or America.Comment Posted By Kate On 30.11.2006 @ 18:30
Rick, you are totally correct about Bush's communication skills. I've been alarmed since the State of the Union in January of 2004 when he didn't even get the bump that most Presidents get. People stopped listening to him. And how did they allow Cheney to be totally discredited and no use to the President politically.
I became concerned in the spring of 2005 when Bush was absolutely not communicaing the war issues and the media was doing their "lowest approval ratings ever" and he never fought back.
He owed that to the troops and he failed.Comment Posted By Kate On 9.11.2006 @ 20:41
Rick-this is an overly gloomy scenario. The Republicans may lose the House but the losses will be modest. I actually hope the Republicans lose the Senate. I am a supporter of John Bolten and watched the hearings on his confirmation a year ago. The Republicans put on a sorry performance that convinced me they prefer and feel more comfortable being in the minority.
However, I detest the media, absolutely detest them. The international left has merely subcontracted out their agenda to the inept Democrats. Others will too. So when I vote on November 7 I will be voting to deny the sneering, anti-American international left a victory. That's who I am voting against. The AP is particulary disgusting, they are more a cheerleading squad than a respectable, objective newswire service.Comment Posted By Kate On 11.10.2006 @ 04:15
Most polls are meaningless, but a poll in the middle of a war is particularly suspect. When this is over, I am sure the Lebanese will condemn all who bought this upon them, including Hezbullah.Comment Posted By Kate On 29.07.2006 @ 19:03
Overly gloomy, Rick. The MNF could be there for 5-10 years. If the US plays it cards right, the discontent among the younger people in Iran could lead to the overthrow of the entrenched, corrupt and powerful Mullahs.
Then Hizzaballah would lose both its patrons, Iran and Syria.
The immediate issue is to make sure Israel degrades Hizzballah and its capabilities sufficiently this time. The US seems to be willing to do this, just need Israel to pick up the pace.Comment Posted By Kate On 29.07.2006 @ 07:43
Europe has signed a separate peace with the terrorists. The Italians are arresting their own intelligence officers for goodness sake.
American, I'm not sure. I think we may pull it out, but it might take another attack and many more years.
Leading the surrender: the international, anti-American left who hates America so much that it is making a deal with the devil.
What they want is world government by the international left. That's not what they will get however.Comment Posted By Kate On 7.07.2006 @ 18:29